Python 3.x 在Python 3中重写属性的抽象设置器
在Python3中,哪种最简单/最具Python风格的方法可以仅覆盖抽象属性的setter?变量3似乎意味着派生类实现者所付出的努力最少。对吗?它有缺点吗Python 3.x 在Python 3中重写属性的抽象设置器,python-3.x,properties,abstract-methods,Python 3.x,Properties,Abstract Methods,在Python3中,哪种最简单/最具Python风格的方法可以仅覆盖抽象属性的setter?变量3似乎意味着派生类实现者所付出的努力最少。对吗?它有缺点吗 import abc class A1(metaclass=abc.ABCMeta): def __init__(self, x, **kwargs): super().__init__(**kwargs) self._x = x @property def x(self):
import abc
class A1(metaclass=abc.ABCMeta):
def __init__(self, x, **kwargs):
super().__init__(**kwargs)
self._x = x
@property
def x(self):
return self._x
@x.setter
@abc.abstractmethod
def x(self, value):
self._x = value
class B1(A1):
@property
def x(self):
return super().x
@x.setter
def x(self, value):
print("B1 setter")
super(B1, self.__class__).x.fset(self, value)
b1 = B1(x=1)
b1.x = 3
print(b1.x)
class A2(metaclass=abc.ABCMeta):
def __init__(self, x, **kwargs):
super().__init__(**kwargs)
self._x = x
@abc.abstractmethod
def _get_x(self):
return self._x
@abc.abstractmethod
def _set_x(self, value):
self._x = value
x = property(_get_x, _set_x)
class B2(A2):
def _get_x(self):
return super()._get_x()
def _set_x(self, value):
print("B2 setter")
super()._set_x(value)
x = property(_get_x, _set_x)
b2 = B2(x=1)
b2.x = 3
print(b2.x)
class A3(metaclass=abc.ABCMeta):
def __init__(self, x, **kwargs):
super().__init__(**kwargs)
self._x = x
def _get_x(self):
return self._x
@abc.abstractmethod
def _set_x(self, value):
self._x = value
x = property(
lambda self: self._get_x(),
lambda self, value: self._set_x(value))
class B3(A3):
def _set_x(self, value):
print("B3 setter")
super()._set_x(value)
b3 = B3(x=1)
b3.x = 3
print(b3.x)
因此,是的,您在其中列出了很多方法-尽管需要更多代码的是变体3,但最严格、最不令人惊讶的方法是变体1- 它可以正常工作,而且可读性很好,没有什么令人惊讶的——而且似乎没有比在那里显式调用
fget
更简单的方法了