mystilleef schreef: > Ant wrote: >> We seem to be flogging a dead horse now. Is the following a fair >> summary: >> >> Q. What is the Pythonic way of implementing getters and setters? >> >> A. Use attributes. >> >> Quote: "I put a lot more effort into choosing method and function >> names" >> >> Wisdom: Python is a different paradigm from (e.g.) Java w.r.t. >> accessors: Put the effort you would have put into choosing accessor >> names into choosing attribute names. >> >> Anything else to add to this? Or can it be put to bed? > > Here are the lessons I've learned (the hard way). > > 1) Make all attributes of a class private or protected. You can make > them public later if need be. If anyone tells you making attributes > private/protected is not Pythonic ignore them. You'll thank me when > your code base grows. > 2) If a data attribute might likely be an API, think about controlling > access to via "properties". That's the pythonic way to implement > accessors and mutators > > I guess people who've done medium to large scale programming in Python > already know this.
Here's what I have learned from this discussion: 1. Give all symbols in your public interface a sensible name. 2. Don't use accessors and mutators for trivial attributes. If needed you can always add them later via properties. You seem to imply that your rule #1 would have prevented the problem you're experiencing. After this whole discussion, frankly I still don't understand how it would have done that. -- If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton Roel Schroeven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
