John Williams <jrw@pobox.com> wrote in news:3E300A13.6020303@pobox.com:
Compared to the other proposal going around (which I'll call Guido's, since he brought it up), the really big advantage of my proposal is that you can use it to do something like adding a property to a class implicitly by defining its getter and setter methods:
class A(object):
def get foo(self): "Getter for property 'foo'." return self.__foo
def set foo(self, foo): "Setter for property 'foo'." self.__foo = foo
<snip>
At this stage I'd much rather see Guido's proposal implemented, unless someone comes up with a truly ingenious way to combine the advantages of both.
How about this: class A(object): def foo(self, foo) [property.set]: "Setter for property 'foo'." self.__foo = foo def foo(self) [property.get]: "Getter for property 'foo'." return self.__foo Then add static methods to property that look something like this: def set(fn): if isinstance(fn, property): return property(fn.fget, fn, fn.fdel, fn.__doc__) else: return property(fset=fn) def get(fn): ... def delete(fn): ... -- Duncan Booth duncan@rcp.co.uk int month(char *p){return(124864/((p[0]+p[1]-p[2]&0x1f)+1)%12)["\5\x8\3" "\6\7\xb\1\x9\xa\2\0\4"];} // Who said my code was obscure?