RetroSearch Browse

Wed Sep 13 19:13:57 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-September/149540.html

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivskyi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> @Guido
> > One would have to introduce some kind of convention
> > where you can write properties with a leading _
>
> One doesn't even need the @property decorator in this case.
> For example:
>
> def __getattr__(name):
>     g = globals()
>     name = '_' + name
>     if name in g:
>         return g[name]()
>     raise AttributeError(...)
>
> def _attr():
>     "do something"
>     return actual_object
>
> One can even write a decorator that would change the name automatically
> (but this will require a call at the end of module to unbind original
> names).
> The space for play is infinite. The question is what exactly is needed.
> I would say that already basic customisation (like __getattr__) will be
> enough.
> IIUC, this will be actually a bit faster than setting __class__ since only
> "customized"
> attributes will be affected.
>

That last sentence is a key observation. Do we even know whether there are
(non-toy) things that you can do *in principle* with __class__ assignment
but which are too slow *in practice* to bother? And if yes, is __getattr__
fast enough? @property?

IMO we're still looking for applications.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20170913/64355948/attachment.html>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-September/149540.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 549: Instance Properties (aka: module properties)