On Nov 1, 2007, at 9:18 PM, Fred Drake wrote:
Thanks! Of all the proposals that have been presented, I still like
that the best.
I've attached a quick hack of an implementation, just to play with it
and see how it feels. Here's an example use:
from property import property
class Base(o
> The API and almost all test cases are defined in a _FileLock base
> class. You could (in theory at least) subclass it to provide locking
> through some other shared resource like a database and not have to
> write and or many other test cases.
Okay, this is up on my website:
On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:23 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> BTW, +1 on this. I like Fred's suggestion of property.set().
Thanks! Of all the proposals that have been presented, I still like
that the best.
Guido's use case of wanting to give the r/w property a different name
than the r/o property is
On 11/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:11 AM 11/2/2007 +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
> >Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > > Let's stick with "propset" which has precedent as an svn action and
> > > serves as a short, simple mnemonic to the functionality.
> >
> >But if we're going to h
At 11:11 AM 11/2/2007 +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
>Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > Let's stick with "propset" which has precedent as an svn action and
> > serves as a short, simple mnemonic to the functionality.
>
>But if we're going to have "propset", it raises the question
>of why there isn't a "propg
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Let's stick with "propset" which has precedent as an svn action and
> serves as a short, simple mnemonic to the functionality.
But if we're going to have "propset", it raises the question
of why there isn't a "propget".
--
Greg
Fred Drake wrote:
>@property
>def attribute(self):
>return 42
>
>@property.set
>def attribute(self, value):
>self._ignored = value
Hmmm... if you were allowed general lvalues as the target of a
def, you could write that as
def attribute.
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> if you want more control, you can just get the property object out of
> the class you want
You're quite right. I was thinking that getting the
property would trigger the access machinery, but of
course you're getting it from the class rather than
the instance, so that doe
-1. Looks like more magic, not less, to me.
On 11/1/07, Tony Lownds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 10:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > This is a minor nit, as with all decorators that take an argument,
> > it seems like it sets up a hard-to-debug error condition if you were
>
2007/10/25, Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Clicking on one of the filter links changes the title back. (No Keyword,
> Patch, P3K)
Fixed, this was a bug, :(
> I think the keyword and keywords interface can be improved. Do you have
> any plans in that direction?
Surely!
But, no, I have no pl
On Nov 1, 2007, at 10:26 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is a minor nit, as with all decorators that take an argument,
> it seems like it sets up a hard-to-debug error condition if you were
> to accidentally forget it:
>
> @property
> def foo(): ...
> @property.set
> def foo(): ...
Hello people!
I'm following the issue 1259 (http://bugs.python.org/issue1259)
It basically says that this should be ok: "'asd'.find('s', None,
None)", as the documentation says that "start" and "end" arguments
behaves like in slices (right now it gives a TypeError).
I created a patch, that solve
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (10/25/07 - 11/01/07)
Tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
1314 open (+21) / 11538 closed (+22) / 12852 total (+43)
Open issues with patches: 415
Average durati
At 07:01 AM 11/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>However I don't approve of it. It has always been and will always
>continue to be my position that these are semantically unkosher,
>because it means that you can't wrap them in convenience functions or
>invoke them in different contexts, and th
On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a minor nit, as with all decorators that take an argument, it
> seems like it sets up a hard-to-debug error condition if you were to
> accidentally forget it:
>
> @property
> def foo(): ...
> @property.set
> def foo(
Issue http://bugs.python.org/issue1663329 details an annoyance in the
subprocess module that has affected several users, including me.
Essentially, closing hundreds of thousands of file descriptors by
round-tripping through the python exception machinery is very slow,
taking hundreds of mi
On 02:01 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As long as we're all tossing out ideas here, my 2�. I vastly prefer
this:
>>@property.set
to this:
> @property.set(attribute)
I don't approve of it. It has always been and will always
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 1, 2007, at 10:01 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 10/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As long as we're all tossing out ideas here, my 2¢. I vastly prefer
>> this:
>>
>> On 02:43 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> On 10/31/
On 10/31/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As long as we're all tossing out ideas here, my 2¢. I vastly prefer
> this:
>
> On 02:43 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On 10/31/07, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>@property.set
> >>def attribute(self, value)
"Steven Bethard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On 10/31/07, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If I had to choose built-in names, though, I'd prefer "property",
>> "propset", "propdel". Another possibility that seems reasonable
>> (perhaps a bit better) would be:
>>
20 matches
Mail list logo
