Property Inheritance Pattern

General Usage
,
20

I don’t think this test should be done. t should have a field called super, and if it doesn’t, you should get an error. Right now, it would just do nothing.

And isn’t it a bit overly verbose? I think this should work as well:

function Base.getproperty(o::Object, s::Symbol)
    if hasfield(typeof(o), s) 
        return getfield(o, s)
    end
    return o.super.s
end

function Base.setproperty!(o::Object, s::Symbol, x)
    if hasfield(typeof(o), s) 
        setfield!(o, s, x)
    else
        o.super.s = x
    end
end