Re: [ANN] Idle v1.0

[steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Duncan Cross <duncan.cross@gmail.com> wrote:
> You mean "throw an error", presumably? The return value of __usedindex
> or __newindex isn't used.

Sure.

> You mean, the "raw" table entry for a property name would be a
> getter/setter function, and __usedindex would call it? That works for
> setting, but what about getting - you'd still only get the function
> itself.

I was thinking of the case where the setter was non-trivial, but the
getter was the field itself.