In article <1069214841.6983.59.camel at localhost.localdomain>, Jeremy Hylton <jeremy at alum.mit.edu> wrote: > The change was reported on python-dev, but apparently got left out of > the NEWS file. Here are the details: > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-April/034605.html Thanks! Now that you mention it, I vaguely remember something of that discussion. But the messages there seem to be mostly or entirely about preventing __setattr__ on built-in types (justifiably called "evil" in the thread) while the code I needed this for was to do it on my own types. Was there some other discussion about preventing object.__setattr__ on non-builtins or was this just an unintended consequence? Not that it matters much now, it's done... Of course, all of this has led me to realize that my code was unnecessarily obscure: I should have just used setattr(cls,...) -- David Eppstein http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/ Univ. of California, Irvine, School of Information & Computer Science
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