dynamic attribute syntax

[castironpi]

Hi all,
Thinking of a syntax for 'getattr' and 'setattr' dynamic access.

'obj.prop' has an easy access, but

att= 'prop'
getattr( obj, att )

is much clumsier, while no less useful, maybe more.

What are the changes, pros and cons, involved in something like:

obj:att for a dynamic access, and obj.att for static?

Snice readability is a factor, I'm open to other markings than ':'.
'$' and '?' are available, and I note that a~b, a:b, and, a!b for
identifiers 'a' and 'b' are unambiguous.

[Paul Boddie]

On 17 Aug, 21:29, castironpi <[e-mail]:

>
What are the changes, pros and cons, involved in something like:

obj:att for a dynamic access, and obj.att for static?

A previous proposal and discussion can be found here:

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0363/

Paul

[castironpi]

On Aug 17, 2:46*pm, Paul Boddie <[e-mail]:

On 17 Aug, 21:29, castironpi <[e-mail]:

What are the changes, pros and cons, involved in something like:

obj:att for a dynamic access, and obj.att for static?

A previous proposal and discussion can be found here:

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0363/

Paul

Thanks for the reference. Well, check out the two alternatives, a~b
and a!b, which are easy on the eyes, and weren't proposed, but don't
allow expressions. (Turns out 'if a:b' is valid, so never mind that
one.) I also won't let you forget that $ and ? are unused so far
too. I see syntax was one of the complaints.

[Fredrik Lundh]

castironpi wrote:

'obj.prop' has an easy access, but

att= 'prop'
getattr( obj, att )

is much clumsier, while no less useful, maybe more.

maybe more? ok, you *are* utterly and completely unable to post
anything that makes any sense at all to anyone that uses Python.
plonkeliplonk.

[castironpi]

On Aug 17, 3:05*pm, Fredrik Lundh <[e-mail]:

castironpi wrote:

'obj.prop' has an easy access, but

att= 'prop'
getattr( obj, att )

is much clumsier, while no less useful, maybe more.

maybe more? *ok, you *are* utterly and completely unable to post
anything that makes any sense at all to anyone that uses Python.
plonkeliplonk.

More constructive contributions on both sides there. Good one.