Message136000
| Author |
dsdale24 |
| Recipients |
Darren.Dale, benjamin.peterson, daniel.urban, dsdale24, ncoghlan, ned.deily |
| Date |
2011年05月14日.22:36:34 |
| SpamBayes Score |
4.4940478e-07 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<BANLkTikznqPySO+Z3NyXBPg+4bVX_t6LVQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<BANLkTimjxvpagN8T6577riE90j+VncTL3A@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content |
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Benjamin Peterson
<report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Benjamin Peterson <benjamin@python.org> added the comment:
>
> 2011年5月14日 Darren Dale <report@bugs.python.org>:
>>
>> Darren Dale <dsdale24@gmail.com> added the comment:
>>
>> It definitely is a common case, and always will be. You can't begin
>> using abstractproperty.abstract(getter/setter/deleter) until you have
>> an abstract property, which requires passing a (potentially abstract)
>> method to the constructor.
>
> What about
>
> @abstractproperty
> def something(): pass
>
> @abstractproperty.setter
> def set(): pass
>
> @abstractproperty.deleter
> def delete: pass
>
> requires you to pass a method (explicitly) to a constructor?
@abstractproperty
def something(): pass
takes the "something" function and passes it to the abstractproperty()
constructor.
It doesn't appear that you are familiar with how the decorator syntax
works for properties. Here is how your example should probably look:
@abstractproperty
def something(): pass
@something.setter
def something(): pass
@something.deleter
def something(): pass |
|