[issue39707] Abstract property setter/deleter implementation not enforced, but documented as such

[Josh Rosenberg]

Josh Rosenberg <shadowranger+python at gmail.com> added the comment:

If this is going to be closed as rejected, I think it still needs some improvement to the documentation. Right now, the docs for abstractproperty (deprecated in favor of combining property and abstractmethod) state:

"If only some components are abstract, only those components need to be updated to create a concrete property in a subclass:"

This heavily implies that if *all* components of the property are abstract, they must *all* be updated to create a concrete property on the subclass, when that is not the case (it's documenting a special way of overriding just one component by borrowing the base class, not a normal means of defining a property). If nothing else, mentioning this quirk in the docs seems like it would save confusion (e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65224767/python-abstract-property-cant-instantiate-abstract-class-with-abstract-me ).

----------
assignee:  -> docs at python
components: +Documentation
nosy: +docs at python, josh.r
resolution: rejected -> 
status: closed -> open
title: Abstract property setter/deleter implementation not enforced. -> Abstract property setter/deleter implementation not enforced, but documented as such
versions: +Python 3.10, Python 3.8, Python 3.9

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue39707>
_______________________________________