g.brandl-nospam at gmx.net
Thu Jun 29 09:43:48 CEST 2006
Steve Holden wrote:
> Georg Brandl wrote:
>> Nick Maclaren wrote:
>>>In article <mailman.7574.1151511089.27775.python-list at python.org>,
>>>"Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik at pythonware.com> writes:
>>>|> identical? you only applied @property to one of the methods, and then you're
>>>|> surprised that only one of the methods were turned into a property?
>>>I wasn't expecting EITHER to be turned INTO a property - I was expecting
>>>both methods to be the same, but one would have non-default properties
>>>attached to it.
>> That's another sign that property isn't intended to be used as a decorator.
>> Normally, decorators wrap functions with other functions. property doesn't
>> return a function but a descriptor object.
> OK, I still think the docs need updating, but to explain the above as
> the reason *why* property's use as a decorator is not advised. Or is it
> stylistically and semantically acceptable in the case of a read-only
I'm not the one to judge over that.
> Would it make sense, in the single argument case, to default the doc
> value to fget.__doc__ to support that use case, or should we just not
> create read-only properties by using property as a decorator?
This is actually already the case in 2.5.
More information about the Python-list