is python Object oriented??
Russ.Paielli at gmail.com
Tue Feb 3 06:37:57 CET 2009
On Feb 2, 7:48 pm, "Rhodri James" <rho... at wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 02:16:01 -0000, Russ P. <Russ.Paie... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here we go again. If you have access to the source code (as you nearly
> > always do with Python code), then "breaking the language-enforced data
> > hiding" is a trivial matter of deleting the word "private" (or
> > equivalent).
> If it's that trivial to defeat something that its proponents appear to
> want to be close to an iron-clad guarantee, what on earth is the point
> of using "private" in the first place?
> Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste Herder to the Masses
If a library developer releases the source code of a library, any user
can trivially "defeat" the access restrictions. But if a team of
developers is checking in code for a project, the leader(s) of the
project can insist that the access restrictions be respected to
simplify the management of interfaces. The larger the team, the more
useful that can be. That's why Java, C++, Ada, Scala, and other
languages have a "private" keyword.
More information about the Python-list