On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:27:12 +0100, Michael Foord <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote: > On 27/06/2011 15:08, R. David Murray wrote: > > 'data attributes' can so easily become something else in Python...it > > seems to me that the only real difference between 'data attributes' and > > 'method attributes' in Python is that the latter can be called and the > > former can't. But even that is not an accurate distinction, since a > > 'data attribute' could, in fact, return a callable. > > > > I guess what I'm saying is that I am more comfortable calling them > > all attributes than calling them all members. The term 'members' > > isn't used anywhere in the language itself, as far as I can recall, > > whereas getattr and setattr are evidence that the language considers > > them all attributes. I think we do the documentation readers a > > disservice by obscuring that fact by using other terminology. > > Well perhaps, but where does the language draw the distinction between > attributes and "data attributes" as you all them (a term entirely new to
It doesn't, that's the point. You'll note I put "data attributes" in quotes :) > me)? Only in the descriptor protocol and that term isn't used there > (data-descriptors and non data-descriptors is terminology used in the > documentation there). > > If you're saying that data attributes isn't clear either (I couldn't > quite tell from your email) then how *do* we draw a distinction. We > could talk about instance attributes, non-descriptor class attributes > and descriptors, but that terminology requires a reasonably advanced > understanding of the Python data model. That's why I said it could be difficult to find good wording when discussing both methods and "other things". Most people have a pretty clear idea of what methods are, but the non-method stuff in Python does not have any simple description that is also accurate. Maybe 'non-method attribute' is as close as we can get? > I don't think that "all members, made up of attributes plus methods" is > hard to understand. That's a great benefit. The fact that you can > technically treat methods as attributes too is a minor detail. Well, I would find that very hard to understand, since methods are attributes, and as Nick said that is *fundamental* to the language, not a minor detail. -- R. David Murray http://www.bitdance.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
