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

[Ronald O. <ous...@ci...>]

On 16-feb-04, at 16:15, Marc-Antoine Parent wrote:

> Le 04-02-16, =E0 00:00, b.bum a =E9crit :
>> 	def takeAction_(self, sender):
>> 		pass
>> 	takeAction_ =3D selector(takeAction_, type=3D'action')
>
> ...
> Le 04-02-16, =E0 00:11, Bob Ippolito a =E9crit :
>> Why not objc.getter / objc.setter / objc.action?  This is really why=20=

>> Python needs a way to decorate functions that isn't so f*!@#!ing=20
>> ugly.
>
> I am just a clueless lurker, but +1 to having those transformations=20
> sooner rather than later, with as nice a name as you all can devise.=20=

> If we also get syntax sugar at some point, as per Michael Hudson's=20
> post, all the better, but I feel that we (PyObjC users) need a way to=20=

> say those things that does not depend on ObjC selector syntax.

I'm all for adding easy to use names instead of using selector()=20
directly, we'll have to do that anyway if we want to use syntactic=20
sugar later on.

CVS will soon contain the functions that Bob proposed.

>
> Aside: I just had a look at the Cocoa Bindings documentation, and was=20=

> very impressed. I do hope we will be able to exploit this from PyObjC=20=

> as seamlessly as possible, and if my (still very, very limited)=20
> understanding of PyObjC serves me right, following the K-V standards=20=

> is still a stumbling block, and this would definitely help. Please=20
> correct me if I got it all wrong, and it is totally unrelated after=20
> all!

I must admit that I haven't read those documents yet, and haven't done=20=

much with Cocoa Bindinds, but it is my intention that Cocoa Bindings=20
"just work" without special code in python. We're probably not there=20
yet, although Cocoa Bindings should work just fine.

Ronald
--
X|support bv            http://www.xsupport.nl/
T:  +31 610271479       F:  +31 204416173