"Martin v. Löwis" <martin@v.loewis.de> wrote in
news:3E312900.90100@v.loewis.de:
> Duncan Booth wrote:
>> How about this:
>>
>> class A(object):
>>
>> def foo(self, foo) [property.set]:
>> "Setter for property 'foo'."
>> self.__foo = foo
>>
>> def foo(self) [property.get]:
>> "Getter for property 'foo'."
>> return self.__foo
>
> This is beautiful, but it does not work: when defining the getter, you
> need both the old property, and the new function object.
Gah!, I must be asleep today.
Something like this might work (although it is getting a bit messy):
def set(fn):
get, delete, doc = None, None, fn.__doc__
namespace = inspect.getcurrentframe().f_back.f_locals
oldfn = namespace.get(fn.__name__)
if isinstance(oldfn, property):
get, delete, doc = oldfn.fget, oldfn.fdel, oldfn.__doc__
return property(get, fn, delete, doc)
--
Duncan Booth duncan@rcp.co.uk
int month(char *p){return(124864/((p[0]+p[1]-p[2]&0x1f)+1)%12)["\5\x8\3"
"\6\7\xb\1\x9\xa\2\0\4"];} // Who said my code was obscure?
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4