Preventing class methods from being defined

[David Hirschfield]

Thanks for this, it's a great list of the ways it can be done. Here's a 
bit more insight into the arrangement I'm trying to get:

restrict = True

class A(object):
    _restrict = ["test"]
   
    def _null(self, *args, **kws):
        raise Exception,"not allowed to access"
       
    def test(self):
        print "test restricted"
   
    def __init__(self):
        if restrict:
            for f in self._restrict:
                setattr(self,f,self._null)
       
class C(R):
    def __init__(self):
        super(C,self).__init__()
       
    def test(self):
        print "test from c"


In this design, calling c.test() where c is an instance of C will raise 
an exception. Now, the only thing I'd like is to not have to fill out 
that _restrict list like that, but to have some function or something 
that let's me say which methods are restricted in the same way you 
define class methods or properties, i.e.:

class A(object):
    _restrict = []
   
    def _null(self, *args, **kws):
        raise Exception,"not allowed to access"
       
    def test(self):
        print "test restricted"
    restrict(test)
    #### this does some magic to insert "test" into the _restrict list


I can't really find a way to make that work with descriptors, and it 
can't just be a function call, because I won't know what object to get 
the _restrict list from. Is there a way to refer to the class that "is 
being defined" when calling a function or classmethod?
So, ideas on how to accomplish that...again, greatly appreciated.
-Dave

Bengt Richter wrote:

>On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:23:30 -0800, David Hirschfield <davidh at ilm.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I should have explicitly mentioned that I didn't want this particular 
>>solution, for a number of silly reasons.
>>Is there another way to make this work, without needing to place an 
>>explicit "if allowed" around each method definition?
>>
>>    
>>
>Seems like you can
>a. define the class with all methods defined within, and use a metaclass to prune
>   out the ones you don't want, which Alex provided.
>b. define the class with conditional execution of the method definitions, which you just rejected.
>c. define the class with no iffy methods at all, and add them afterwards
>   c1. in a metaclass that adds them and possibly also defines them for that purpose
>   c2. by plain statements adding method functions as class attributes
>d. define all the methods normally, but monitor attribute access on the class and raise
>   attribute error for the methods that aren't supposed to be there.
>e. raise an exception conditionally _within_ methods that aren't supposed to be there, if called.
>
>What would you like?
>
>BTW, defining the method functions someplace other than within the body of the class whose methods
>they are to become has some subtleties, since the functions can potentially refer to different
>global scopes than that of the class (e.g. if you take the functions from an imported module)
>and/or use closure-defined cell variables (e.g. if the method function is defined within a factory function).
>This can be used to advantage sometimes, but needs good documentation to be clear for the next code maintainer ;-)
>
>I guess I should re-read your original requirements that led to thes design ideas.
>
>Regards,
>Bengt Richter
>  
>

-- 
Presenting:
mediocre nebula.