is python Object oriented??

Russ P. Russ.Paielli at gmail.com
Wed Feb 4 06:04:30 CET 2009


On Feb 3, 7:49 pm, "Rhodri James" <rho... at wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 01:13:32 -0000, Russ P. <Russ.Paie... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 3, 4:05 pm, "Rhodri James" <rho... at wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> I'm very much of the second opinion; it was Russ who did the sudden  
> >> volte
> >> face and declared that it was trivial to circumvent.
>
> > Whoa! Hold on a minute here. Your failure to understand a simple idea
> > does not constitute a "sudden volte" (whatever that is) on my part.
>
> My apologies.  "Volte-face" should have had a hyphen in it.
>
> > Let me try to explain again what should be fairly obvious.
>
> I understood you just fine.  It was how what you described was
> consistent with your previous position that "private" was needed
> for enforcement purposes, while the leading underscore convention
> relied on team discipline and was therefore insufficient.  Since
> you've clarified that "private" enforces privacy through... er...
> team discipline, I'm now just very confused as to what you think
> it buys you.
>
> --
> Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste Herder to the Masses

You need team discipline either way. The question here is to what
extent the language supports the discipline. If you are going to check
for access violations anyway with third-party tools or code reviews,
why not let the language do the job for you automatically (or at least
take a first cut at it)?

Imagine you own a company, and you decide to lease an office building.
Would you expect the office doors to have locks on them? Oh, you
would? Why? You mean you don't "trust" your co-workers? What are locks
but enforced access restriction?

What people like you are saying is that you don't need no stinkin'
locks because your co-workers are all "consenting adults" whom you
trust. Actually, you're saying even more than that. You're saying that
office doors never need locks, because everyone should trust their co-
workers. All you need is a "keep-out" sign on the door (leading
underscores). And you are presenting as evidence for your position the
fact that people occasionally get locked out of an office that they
need to get into.

I'm saying, fine, if you trust your co-workers, then keep the doors
unlocked, but please don't insist that office doors come without
locks. Yes, locks occasionally cause inconvenience, but they serve a
very useful purpose if used properly.




More information about the Python-list mailing list