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

[b.bum <bb...@ma...>]

On Feb 16, 2004, at 10:27 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> You did manage to beat me. There's one thing I don't like about your 
> change: the function name, I prefer an initial lowercase letter. That 
> also reads nicer with the proposed syntax changes for properties:
>
> 	def objc.accessor setFoo(self, newFoo):
> 	
> or
> 	def setFoo(self, newFoo) [objc.accessor]:

I'm somewhat indifferent to casing on this.  I chose Accessor over 
accessor because it matched the case of IBAction and IBOutlet.   Given 
the usage pattern, 'accessor' works fine, too.

> I'm not yet 100% sure if I like a single function instead of a pair of 
> functions.

The KVO/KVC use 'accessor method' or 'accessor methods' to refer to 
both the setter and getter.   I chose a single function implementation 
to continue that usage pattern.   Personally, I like the single 
function pattern because it eliminates a detail from the resulting 
implementation;  it perpetuates the notion that PyObjC's bridge should 
be as thin and transparent as possible.

b.bum