is it possible to set namespace to an object.

[glomde]

On 21 Jan, 22:00, George Sakkis <george.sak... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2:52 pm, glomde <brk... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 21 Jan, 20:16, George Sakkis <george.sak... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 21, 1:56 pm, glomde <brk... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 21 Jan, 18:59, Wildemar Wildenburger
>
> > > > <lasses_w... at klapptsowieso.net> wrote:
> > > > > glomde wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
>
> > > > > > is it somehow possible to set the current namespace so that is in an
> > > > > > object.
> > > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > set namespace testObj
> > > > > > Name = "Test"
>
> > > > > > Name would set testObj.Name to "Test".
>
> > > > > > [snip]
>
> > > > > > Is the above possible?
>
> > > > > Don't know, sorry. But let me ask you this: Why do you want to do this?
> > > > > Maybe there is another way to solve the problem that you want to solve.
>
> > > > The reason is that I do not want to repeat myself. It is to set up XML
> > > > type like
> > > > trees and I would like to be able to do something like.
>
> > > > with ElemA():
> > > >   Name = "Top"
> > > >   Description "Blahaha..."
> > > >   with ElemB():
> > > >     Name = "ChildA"
> > > >     Description "Blahaha..."
> > > >  ....
>
> > > > This would be the instead of.
> > > > with ElemA() as node:
> > > >   node.Name = "Top"
> > > >   node.Description "Blahaha..."
> > > >   with ElemB() as node:
> > > >     node.Name = "ChildA"
> > > >     node.Description "Blahaha..."
> > > >  ....
>
> > > > So to save typing and have something that I think looks nicer.
>
> > > ... and more confusing for anyone reading the code (including you
> > > after a few weeks/months). If you want to save a few keystrokes, you
> > > may use 'n' instead of 'node' or use an editor with easy auto
> > > completion.
>
> > > By the way, is there any particular reason for generating the XML
> > > programmatically like this ? Why not have a separate template and use
> > > one of the dozen template engines to populate it ?
>
> > > George
>
> > I am not using it for XML generation. It was only an example. But
> > the reason for using it programmatically is that you mix power
> > of python with templating. Using for loops and so on.
>
> Any template engine worth its name supports loops. Other than that,
> various engines provide different degrees of integration with Python,
> from pretty limited (e.g. Django templates) to quite extensive (e.g.
> Mako, Tenjin).
>
> > The above was only an example. And yes it might be confusing if you
> > read the code. But I still want to do it, the question is it possible?
>
> I would be surprised if it is. Yet another idea you may want to
> explore if you want that syntax so much is by (ab)using the class
> statement since it introduces a new namespace:
>
> class ElemA:
>   Name = "Top"
>   Description "Blahaha..."
>   class ElemB:
>     Name = "ChildA"
>     Description "Blahaha..."
>
> PEP 359 would address this easily (it's actually the first use case
> shown) but unfortunately it was withdrawn.
>
> George
>
> [1]http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0359/#example-simple-namespaces

Yes the make statement would have done it. But I realized that it
might be possible if it is possible to override the __setattr__ of
local. Then the enter function would set a global variable and the
default setattr would set/get variables from this variable.

Is this possible?