Le Wednesday 03 September 2008 19:38:13 Bruno Desthuilliers, vous avez écrit : > FWIW, if there's no computation on getting or setting value, you can > make it a plain attribute.
Yes, this is the problem with these tiny examples, we don't know at which point we must simplify them... > > But while it's quite clear that in this example use case it would be > better to have only one property (weither square or value, depending on > which is the most often use), things are not always that simple in real > world code, and - as you mentionned - there may be times where you have > interdependant properties and really want to avoid recomputing the same > thing over and over. Now there's no one size fits all solution here - > it's an optimization problem, and as such depends on real use cases. Yes, my advice was exactly in that sense, it's an optimization problem, duplicating such a data is a caching mechanism, and should be done knowingly, in acceptance of all the complication it comes with. -- _____________ Maric Michaud -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
