On Dec 9, 1:15 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard Jones a écrit : > > > > > Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > > >>class A(object): > >> @apply > >> def a(): > >> def fget(self): > >> return self._a > >> def fset(self, val): > >> self._a = val > >> return property(**locals()) > >> def __init__(self): > >> self.a = "foo" > > > That property setup seems overly complicated. As far as I can see, it only > > avoids defining the setter in the class namespace, > > Yes. That's mosly the point. > > > yet is more complicated > > and obfuscated to boot ;) > > Well, that's your POV, so what can I say ? It's indeed a bit hackish, > and requires a couple minutes of attention the first time you see it. > And you just have to learn it once !-) > > Now I'd certainly prefer something like: > > class A(object): > @propget > def a(self): > return self._a > @propset > def a(self, val): > self._a = val > > But until there's something similar *builtin*, I'll stick to the @apply > trick.
I like Guido's proposal for read/write properties. http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-November/075182.html It works pretty well and is readable. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
