<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 1/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Matt Draisey</b> <<a href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 17:17 -0800, Josiah Carlson wrote:<br><br>> You can already do this with the following code:<br>><br>> __gl = globals()<br>> for name in __gl.keys():<br>> if name[:1] == '_' and len(name) > 1 and
name.count('_') == 1:<br>> del __gl[name]<br>> del __gl<br>><br>> - Josiah<br><br>No, that is not what I meant. I wasn't talking about deleting<br>temporaries but not publishing private objects. Brett Cannon understood
<br>when he said, "Private namespaces are not exactly a popular thing in<br>Python". But functional programming style and generators are all the<br>rage and they often drag in private state via a closure.</blockquote>
<div><br>True, but you can still get at everything in either (generators, for instance, expose the paused execution frame and gives you access to everything). But I consider these more of an exception instead of the rule. The only way I can see myself approving something like this is if it helped with security (which it might, but I don't know if it would be the best solution).