Message138206
| Author | ncoghlan |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Darren.Dale, benjamin.peterson, daniel.urban, dsdale24, eric.araujo, eric.snow, michael.foord, ncoghlan, stutzbach |
| Date | 2011-06-12.12:02:41 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.015709586 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1307880162.31.0.554485244875.issue11610@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
In that paragraph, I was only talking about cases where "foo = 1" *isn't* a valid override (which, I hope you'll agree, it typically won't be). Your described approach of declaring an abstract property and then overriding it with an ordinary class attribute is part of the answer I gave Eric in pointing out why a separate concept of an abstract attribute isn't really necessary. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2011-06-12 12:02:42 | ncoghlan | set | recipients: + ncoghlan, benjamin.peterson, stutzbach, eric.araujo, michael.foord, daniel.urban, dsdale24, eric.snow, Darren.Dale |
| 2011-06-12 12:02:42 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1307880162.31.0.554485244875.issue11610@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011-06-12 12:02:41 | ncoghlan | link | issue11610 messages |
| 2011-06-12 12:02:41 | ncoghlan | create | |