[Python-Dev] __mangled in stdlib considered poor form

[Guido van Rossum]

> > I'd like to see all occurrances of __mangledName in the stdlib
> > removed and replaced with just _mangledName.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >    What sayeth the rest of python-dev?
> 
> +1.

+0.5 here. Let's first get the terminology straight: __foo is a
private name, _Class__foo is the mangled form of that. Whenever the
stdlib uses a mangled name, clearly what ought to be done is change
the private name to a single underscore. (I don't want to call that
protected, because that has a different meaning in Java etc.)

There's one potential use case where I'd like to keep the private name
even if there's a mangled use of it nearby: when the private name
really is intended to be private, and the mangled use is a "friend" in
the C++ sense. Sometimes (though rarely) the stdlib has to indulge in
practices that aren't good example code, because it's the stdlib, and
it should implement functionality in the most bulletproof way
possible. Using private names for internal details is the right thing
sometimes.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)