Re: [Pyobjc-dev] Default to returning (void)?

[Bob I. <bo...@re...>]

On Feb 16, 2004, at 12:00 AM, b.bum wrote:

> On Feb 15, 2004, at 8:36 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>> At least in Python 2.3.x, the only way to generate "LOAD_CONST 0 
>> (None) / RETURN_VALUE" is either a bare return, or no return at all.  
>> If you analyze the bytecode for a function, and it has no other 
>> RETURN_VALUE pairs.. then you can safely assume that it should 
>> default to void.
>
> Eeeewwwww....
>
> Nuts.   Defaulting to  a (void) return will break for any getter, so I 
> can see how trying to figure this out to do the right thing would be 
> preferable.

Yeah, it's gross, but analyzing the bytecode *would* work ;)

> Barring automated intelligence, being able to do something like the 
> following would be preferable to the crypting exposed signatures we 
> have today.
>
>     def setContent_(self, someContent):
>         print "Setting content...."
>         self._content = someContent
>     setContent_ = selector(setContent_, type='setter')
> 	objc.makeSetter(setContent_) # this would be even better
>
> 	def takeAction_(self, sender):
> 		pass
> 	takeAction_ = selector(takeAction_, type='action')

Why not objc.getter / objc.setter / objc.action?  This is really why 
Python needs a way to decorate functions that isn't so f*!@#!ing ugly.

-bob