On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Larry Hastings <larry@hastings.org> wrote:
Properties are a wonderful facility. But they only work on conventional objects. Specifically, they *don't* work on module objects. It would be nice to extend module objects so properties worked there too.
As MAL notes, the issues with such an approach are: - code executed at module scope - code in inner scopes that uses "global" - code that uses globals() - code that directly modifies a module's __dict__ There is too much code that expects to be able to modify a module's namespace directly without going through the attribute access machinery. However, a slightly more practical suggestion might be: 1. Officially bless the practice of placing class instances in sys.modules (currently this is tolerated, since it's the only way to manage things like lazy module loading, but not officially recommended as the way to achieve "module properties") 2. Change sys from a module object to an ordinary class instance Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia