On May 31, 2012 1:31 AM, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
>
> Agreed this could go on the tracker, but I don't see the need for a
Python-Ideas detour.
+1
> It seems worth fixing (and I vaguely recall there was some follow-up last
time?).
You may be thinking of the abstract property fixes that went in
Agreed this could go on the tracker, but I don't see the need for a
Python-Ideas detour. It seems worth fixing (and I vaguely recall there was
some follow-up last time?).
--Guido van Rossum (sent from Android phone)
On May 29, 2012 11:58 PM, "Terry Reedy" wrote:
> On 5/30/2012 1:58 AM, cyberdup.
On 5/30/2012 1:58 AM, cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I apologize if I violate (or am violating) some sacred mailing list rules.
Torsten wrote back in 2010
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099672.html) about
property inheritance behavior and super(). Specifically, only
Hi,
I apologize if I violate (or am violating) some sacred mailing list rules.
Torsten wrote back in 2010
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099672.html) about
property inheritance behavior and super(). Specifically, only fget() behavior
of properties work with super(), not
Hi Python experts.
[It should be obvious, but you can run the code in this message via
python -m doctest body.txt if you saved it as body.txt]
In an application I develop on I want to use properties instead of the
getter/setter paradigm. I ran into a problem overriding a property in
a subclass. W
