Alex Martelli napisał(a): > Wrong! Of _course_ it's an option -- why do you think it matters at all > whether you're the creator of this object?!
Statically typed languages background. Sorry. ;) >> Code below doesn't work, but shows my >> intention: >> >> # obj is instance of BaseClass >> def get_x(self): >> # ... >> def set_x(self, value): >> # ... >> obj.x = property(get_x, set_x) > > def insert_property(obj, name, getter, setter): > class sub(obj.__class__): pass > setattr(sub, name, property(getter, setter)) > obj.__class__ = sub > > See? Of COURSE you can subclass -- not hard at all, really. Let me understand it clearly. If I change __class__ of an object, existing attributes (so methods as well) of an object are still accessible the same way and don't change its values. Only resolution of attributes/methods not found in object is changed, as it uses new version of __class__ to lookup names. Is this right? mk -- . o . >> http://joker.linuxstuff.pl << . . o It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong o o o than forgiveness for being right. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
