与经典的getter+setter相比,@property表示法有什么优点?在哪些特定的情况下,程序员应该选择使用其中一种而不是另一种?

属性:

class MyClass(object):
    @property
    def my_attr(self):
        return self._my_attr

    @my_attr.setter
    def my_attr(self, value):
        self._my_attr = value

没有属性:

class MyClass(object):
    def get_my_attr(self):
        return self._my_attr

    def set_my_attr(self, value):
        self._my_attr = value

当前回答

在Python中,你不会仅仅为了好玩而使用getter或setter或属性。首先只使用属性,然后在需要时,最终迁移到属性,而不必使用类更改代码。

确实有很多带有.py扩展名的代码在任何地方都使用getter和setter、继承和无意义的类,例如一个简单的元组就可以了,但这是人们使用Python用c++或Java编写的代码。

这不是Python代码。

其他回答

简单的答案是:properties轻松获胜。总是这样。

有时需要getter和setter,但即使这样,我也会将它们“隐藏”到外部世界。在Python中有很多方法可以做到这一点(getattr, setattr, __getattribute__,等等…,但最简洁明了的是:

def set_email(self, value):
    if '@' not in value:
        raise Exception("This doesn't look like an email address.")
    self._email = value

def get_email(self):
    return self._email

email = property(get_email, set_email)

下面是一篇简短的文章,介绍Python中的getter和setter主题。

在复杂的项目中,我更喜欢使用带有显式setter函数的只读属性(或getter):

class MyClass(object):
...        
@property
def my_attr(self):
    ...

def set_my_attr(self, value):
    ...

在长期存在的项目中,调试和重构比编写代码本身花费更多的时间。使用@property有几个缺点。Setter,使调试更加困难:

1) python允许为现有对象创建新属性。这使得下面的打印错误很难追踪:

my_object.my_atttr = 4.

如果你的目标是一个复杂的算法,那么你将花费相当多的时间试图找出它不收敛的原因(注意上面一行中额外的“t”)

2) setter有时可能演变成一个复杂而缓慢的方法(例如击中数据库)。对于另一个开发人员来说,很难弄清楚为什么下面的函数非常慢。他可能会花很多时间分析do_something()方法,而my_object。My_attr = 4。其实是减速的原因:

def slow_function(my_object):
    my_object.my_attr = 4.
    my_object.do_something()

@property和传统的getter和setter都有各自的优点。这取决于您的用例。

@property的优点

You don't have to change the interface while changing the implementation of data access. When your project is small, you probably want to use direct attribute access to access a class member. For example, let's say you have an object foo of type Foo, which has a member num. Then you can simply get this member with num = foo.num. As your project grows, you may feel like there needs to be some checks or debugs on the simple attribute access. Then you can do that with a @property within the class. The data access interface remains the same so that there is no need to modify client code. Cited from PEP-8: For simple public data attributes, it is best to expose just the attribute name, without complicated accessor/mutator methods. Keep in mind that Python provides an easy path to future enhancement, should you find that a simple data attribute needs to grow functional behavior. In that case, use properties to hide functional implementation behind simple data attribute access syntax. Using @property for data access in Python is regarded as Pythonic: It can strengthen your self-identification as a Python (not Java) programmer. It can help your job interview if your interviewer thinks Java-style getters and setters are anti-patterns.

传统getter和setter的优点

Traditional getters and setters allow for more complicated data access than simple attribute access. For example, when you are setting a class member, sometimes you need a flag indicating where you would like to force this operation even if something doesn't look perfect. While it is not obvious how to augment a direct member access like foo.num = num, You can easily augment your traditional setter with an additional force parameter: def Foo: def set_num(self, num, force=False): ... Traditional getters and setters make it explicit that a class member access is through a method. This means: What you get as the result may not be the same as what is exactly stored within that class. Even if the access looks like a simple attribute access, the performance can vary greatly from that. Unless your class users expect a @property hiding behind every attribute access statement, making such things explicit can help minimize your class users surprises. As mentioned by @NeilenMarais and in this post, extending traditional getters and setters in subclasses is easier than extending properties. Traditional getters and setters have been widely used for a long time in different languages. If you have people from different backgrounds in your team, they look more familiar than @property. Also, as your project grows, if you may need to migrate from Python to another language that doesn't have @property, using traditional getters and setters would make the migration smoother.

警告

Neither @property nor traditional getters and setters makes the class member private, even if you use double underscore before its name: class Foo: def __init__(self): self.__num = 0 @property def num(self): return self.__num @num.setter def num(self, num): self.__num = num def get_num(self): return self.__num def set_num(self, num): self.__num = num foo = Foo() print(foo.num) # output: 0 print(foo.get_num()) # output: 0 print(foo._Foo__num) # output: 0

我认为两者都有各自的地位。使用@property的一个问题是,很难在子类中使用标准的类机制扩展getter或setter的行为。问题是实际的getter/setter函数隐藏在属性中。

你可以掌握这些函数,比如

class C(object):
    _p = 1
    @property
    def p(self):
        return self._p
    @p.setter
    def p(self, val):
        self._p = val

你可以像C.p.fset和C.p.fset一样访问getter和setter函数,但是你不能很容易地使用普通的方法继承(例如super)工具来扩展它们。在深入研究了super的复杂性之后,你确实可以这样使用super:

# Using super():
class D(C):
    # Cannot use super(D,D) here to define the property
    # since D is not yet defined in this scope.
    @property
    def p(self):
        return super(D,D).p.fget(self)

    @p.setter
    def p(self, val):
        print 'Implement extra functionality here for D'
        super(D,D).p.fset(self, val)

# Using a direct reference to C
class E(C):
    p = C.p

    @p.setter
    def p(self, val):
        print 'Implement extra functionality here for E'
        C.p.fset(self, val)

然而,使用super()是相当笨拙的,因为必须重新定义属性,并且必须使用稍微违反直觉的super(cls,cls)机制来获得p的未绑定副本。

以下是摘自《有效的Python: 90种具体方法来编写更好的Python》(一本令人惊叹的书)的节选。我强烈推荐)。

Things to Remember ✦ Define new class interfaces using simple public attributes and avoid defining setter and getter methods. ✦ Use @property to define special behavior when attributes are accessed on your objects, if necessary. ✦ Follow the rule of least surprise and avoid odd side effects in your @property methods. ✦ Ensure that @property methods are fast; for slow or complex work—especially involving I/O or causing side effects—use normal methods instead. One advanced but common use of @property is transitioning what was once a simple numerical attribute into an on-the-fly calculation. This is extremely helpful because it lets you migrate all existing usage of a class to have new behaviors without requiring any of the call sites to be rewritten (which is especially important if there’s calling code that you don’t control). @property also provides an important stopgap for improving interfaces over time. I especially like @property because it lets you make incremental progress toward a better data model over time. @property is a tool to help you address problems you’ll come across in real-world code. Don’t overuse it. When you find yourself repeatedly extending @property methods, it’s probably time to refactor your class instead of further paving over your code’s poor design. ✦ Use @property to give existing instance attributes new functionality. ✦ Make incremental progress toward better data models by using @property. ✦ Consider refactoring a class and all call sites when you find yourself using @property too heavily.