newb question about @property

[Rhodri James]

On 04/10/17 16:33, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 4 October 2017 at 16:03, bartc<bc at freeuk.com>  wrote:
>> No error. Some would perceive all this as an advantage, but it means you
>> can't just declare a lightweight struct or record 'Point' with exactly two
>> fields x and y. You have to use other solutions ('namedtuples' or whatever,
>> which probably are immutable so that don't work the same way).
>>
>> This is another example of neglecting the basics, but going for more
>> advanced, perhaps more sexy features instead.
> It's another example of a consistent design philosophy (highly dynamic
> classes) that you might not like - possibly even enough that Python
> isn't the best language for you.
> 
> It's not an advantage or a disadvantage, just an approach. Many people
> like it, you may not. Specifically, yes you can't "just declare a
> lightweight struct or record with exactly two fields".

Actually you can:

 >>> class Point:
...   __slots__ = ("x", "y")
...   def __init__(self, x, y):
...     self.x = x
...     self.y = y
...   def __str__(self):
...     return "({0},{1})".format(self.x, self.y)
...
 >>> p = Point(3,4)
 >>> print(p)
(3,4)
 >>> print(p.x)
3
 >>> p.x = 7
 >>> print(p)
(7,4)
 >>> p.z = 2
Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'Point' object has no attribute 'z'

I pretty much never bother to do this because (bart to the contrary) it 
isn't useful if you're thinking in Pythonic terms, but it can be done 
pretty easily.

-- 
Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd