Roy Smith wrote: > Define a class (perhaps a subclass of dict, if you like) > with a __getattr__ method. Then you can just do > > foo.bar.baz.x = y > > with no changes needed to the language.
I think, your solution is very error-prone. If such enhanced dictionary contains "keys" key, what is meaning of d.keys? Is it bound method or dictionary item? After you introduce such dictionary, you cannot add any new method for it, because it may destroy user code, if acciddent name clashing take place. Consider SQLTable class, which have "name" attribute, and bunch of dynamically created named columns. With __getattr__ method you can use SQLTable.column_1 syntax for column access, but what if same column have name "name"? It may be very psychologically inconvenient for user of such class to use same foo.bar syntax for two different purposes. In most real cases it is important to distinguish between two different namespaces - "members" namespace with methods properties etc., and "items" namespace with truly dynamic content. In todays Python such distinction accomplished with two different methods - __getattr(ibute)__ and __getitem__. It is not possible to successfully use only __getattr__ to serve two different purposes. Hense I suggest use __getitem__ for its direct purpose, and only add some syntactic sugar for it Dan Sommers wrote: > Take a look at the "Bunch" recipe in the Python Cookbook: > > http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/52308 This recipe is what is stated in its name - "collector of a bunch of named stuff". It is not suitable for elaborate classes with many methods (such as SQLTable), for above mentioned reason - name cluttering between methods, properties and dynamic content. -- Best regards, Alexander mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
