On Sep 3, 6:34 am, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> The underscore versions are for customizing the lookup process, not for
> dynamically looking up names. If your class needs to do something non-
> standard when you write obj.name, you might need to write methods
>
On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 04:37:54 +, Brian Munroe wrote:
> On Sep 2, 3:33 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>> In a nutshell, like all double-underscore methods, __setattr__ are for
>> overriding behaviour in your own classes. With very few exceptions, you
>>
Brian Munroe a écrit :
> On Sep 2, 3:33 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>
>> In a nutshell, like all double-underscore methods, __setattr__ are for
>> overriding behaviour in your own classes. With very few exceptions, you
>> shouldn't need to directly call doub
On Sep 2, 3:33 pm, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>
> In a nutshell, like all double-underscore methods, __setattr__ are for
> overriding behaviour in your own classes. With very few exceptions, you
> shouldn't need to directly call double-underscore methods (althoug
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 21:41:43 +, Brian Munroe wrote:
> One question though, which I haven't been able to find the answer from
> scouring the internet. What is the difference between calling
> __setattr__ and setattr or __getattr__ and getattr, for that matter?
Have you read the following?
#
On Sep 2, 11:46 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Martelli) wrote:
> If you want to pass the attributes list it's simpler to do that
> directly, avoiding *a and **k constructs. E.g.:
>
> def __init__(self, a, b, attrs):
> self.a = a
> self.b = b
> for attr in attrs:
> name, value =
Nathan Harmston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry if the subject line of post is wrong, but I think that is what
> this is called. I want to create objects with
>
> class Coconuts(object):
> def __init__(self, a, b, *args, **kwargs):
> self.a = a
> self.b = b
>
> def sp
