[XML-SIG] foo.bar vs. foo.get_bar()

[uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com]

> uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com writes:
>  > Note that I don't like the idea of the Python binding officially supporting 
>  > two approaches, i.e. "node.parent" _and_ "node.get_parent()".  I think it's 
>  > great for implementations to provide alternatives, but the binding should 
>  > require one unequivocally.
> 
>   I think the "right" way would be for someone to look at the CORBA
> mapping the DO-SIG put together and follow that strictly; I think it's 
> pretty much through the OMG process.  I've not been following that as
> closely as I'd like due to time constraints.

Unfortunately, there is no specification for CORBA attributes in the do-sig 
Python binding.  I don't recall any discussion on the topic as long as I've 
followed that list, but I can't imagine it is an easy topic, especially when 
you consider that Python ORBs often already need to hijack __[g/s]etattr__ for 
ORB run-time magic, marshalling, and all that.  The seemingly obvious approach 
of "CORBA attributes == Python attributes" could lead to a nightmare for 
Python/CORBA users, considering the delicacy of __[g/s]etattr__, especially in 
the presence of inheritance.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji
FourThought LLC, IT Consultants
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com	(970)481-0805
Software engineering, project management, Intranets and Extranets
http://FourThought.com		http://OpenTechnology.org