Greg Ewing wrote:
Neil Toronto wrote:
It might be nice to be able to declare a one-off namespace:
Yes, things like this have been suggested before. There was a thread not long ago about a 'make' statement, for example, and there have been numerous suggestions for a 'namespace' statement.
My favourite version would be something like
intance foo(property):
def __get__(self): ...
def __set__(self, x): ...
Surely you meant to write "instance". :) I like that spelling. The keyword has exactly the right meaning. I imagine having to create a new keyword just for a bit of syntactic sugar would be the main argument against it. It's not just about saving keystrokes, though.
which would be roughly equivalent to
class _foo(property): ...
foo = _foo()
but without the intermediate class name.
Seems this sort of thing would be trivial with a class decorator, something like "@instance" or "@oneinstance". ("@singleton" would probably make people expect a call to the class to return a unique instance only the first time.) As part of my new delvination (that's a word) into metaclasses, I've been trying to make a metaclass that does the same thing. (No spoilers, please!) Neil