delegation pattern via descriptor

[kedra marbun]

On Jul 5, 7:49 am, Gregory Ewing <greg.ew... at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> kedra marbun wrote:
> > now, i'm asking another favor, what about the 2nd point in my 1st post?
>
> Your original post has dropped off my newsscope, so
> you'll have to remind me what the 2nd point was.
>
> --
> Greg

it's like 'name', it's about info that i think should be passed to
descriptor's __{get|set|delete}__. i wonder what are the reasons for
not passing the class on which the descriptor is attached to, what
pattern is encouraged by this?