As usual, Alex's posts are long and illuminating,
but there is one point where I think he misrepresented me (a bit)
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 12:14:09 +0200, "Alex Martelli" <aleaxit at yahoo.com> wrote:
[about using object.method=callable to override object.__class__.method]
> (e.g., Moshe and others are on record as stating that they
> strongly believe an object's __class__ should always change
> if its behavior does -- i.e., they see the class/behavior
> decoupling as an undesirable language feature, never to be
> actually _used_)
Let me clarify my position, since I do think this is a language feature.
What I said is that adding *methods* (that is, Python functions with first
argument bound to the object) is better done with __class__ mangling --
not that all behaviours do. See the ProxyHandler in urllib2 (Jeremy wrote
that, for history's sake) as a place I think this technique is used
to very good effect. Of course, that made documenting urllib2 close to
impossible (see the documentation for the controtions I had to go through
to properly document it ;-)
Personally, other then the type-class dichotomy, I find Python's object
model perfect -- while I do occasionally find faults in the language,
none have been found by me in the object model. Well, the only slight
wart is that custom setters and getters are *a bit* hard to get right --
I'd love something like __get_[attribute]__ and __set_[attribute]__
as "surgical getters and setters".
--
"I'll be ex-DPL soon anyway so I'm |LUKE: Is Perl better than Python?
looking for someplace else to grab power."|YODA: No...no... no. Quicker,
-- Wichert Akkerman (on debian-private)| easier, more seductive.
For public key, finger moshez at debian.org |http://www.{python,debian,gnu}.org
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