On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote:
> Or:
>
> When a class attribute reference (for class C, say) would yield a
> class method object, it is transformed into an instance method object
> whose __self__ attributes is C.
> <URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html?highlight=__g
> etattr__#the-standard-type-hierarchy>
>
> So the only difference between a regular function and an instance method
> object is the fact that the latter has a __self__ attribute set.
>
> Although even that small difference can be paved over:
>
> def g():
> print("g")
> g.__self__ = a
> a.f = g
What is this example supposed to accomplish? Functions don't merely
not have a __self__ attribute set. The __self__ attribute has no
meaning on a function.
Let's take a different example.
class Dialog(Window):
def __init__(self, parent, title, ok_callback):
super().__init__(parent, title)
self._ok_callback = ok_callback
self._ok_button = Button(self, 'Ok')
self._ok_button.bind(self._ok_callback)
def f(event):
print("Hello world")
dialog = Dialog(None, "Example", f)
dialog.show()
Are you suggesting that dialog._ok_callback should be considered a
method of Dialog, despite the fact that the implementation of Dialog
and the implementation of f are entirely unrelated? If so, then I
think that most OOP practitioners would disagree with you.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
