Open crackcomm opened 7 months ago
You're correct in that it should not be omitting WriteAccess
here. However, using only WriteAccess
is not strictly correct as a read may also be performed depending on how the property was declared. For example, when using the @property
decorator, if you use @myprop.setter
, then it receives self
as the first argument, which allows it to perform a read of the old value if it wants to. So this requires a more complex check.
In this code:
Both occurrences have an incorrect symbol role of read access.
I hacked a patch for my use case: