FEEDBACK WANTED: Type/class unification

[Tom Jenkins]

Leo wrote:

> Not that my opinion matters much, but just in case someone else agrees
> with me, I will post it anyway.
> 
> I like the direction that Python is taking.  However I only have one
> request.  Check out how Ruby handles accessor creation.  I think it
> has a very simple and clean syntax with minimum of typing.
> 
> I like the idea of get/set stuff, but it needs to become
> super-convinient to type in order for it to be used more widely.  I
> would prefer for there being a fast way of telling Python that a
> certain class variable is get-enabled, set-enabled, or both without
> actually having to manually type out the accessor methods.
> 
> Because plain accessor methods always do the same thing, it's a shame
> to waste any lines on them, imo.  It's just a repetitive typing that
> brings no new information.  Only when someone wants to override
> default accessors does it make sense to type it out, imo.
> 
> Just my $.02. :)  This is not meant to be a flame, just a request or a
> question, that's all.
> 

if i remember correctly in the get/set stuff we have to supply a 
statement like:
   x = getset(self.getx, self.setx)

if i am remembering correctly then it should be rather easy for a tool 
to write those def's for you... sort of like doing <Shift><Ctrl>C in 
Delphi... it will stub out your getter/setters and add field 
declarations for your properties.


now-what-do-we-have-if-i-add-my-.02-to-your-.02-ly yr's
Tom