Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?
roy at panix.com
Wed Jan 14 05:43:44 CET 2009
<aaac5b77-0b2e-48fa-9e01-b8cd1cd68833 at v42g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
"Russ P." <Russ.Paielli at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can claim that Python is not strictly object oriented until it
> gets encapsulation (in the sense of data hiding). That is simply a
> fact, and no amount of pleading or obfuscation will change it.
I have no idea if Python is strictly anything. What I do know is that it's
a useful tool. I'll take useful over OOO (Object Oriented Orthodoxy) any
People get all worked up over OO as if it were some kind of religion. If I
want religion, I'll go to shul. What I want from a programming language is
a tool that lets me get my work done. If I transgress against some sacred
tenet of OO religion, it is, as Rev. Dupas would say, all right.
Earlier in this thread, somebody (name elided to avoid me getting pegged
for a indulging in a spelling flame):
> Bare in mind also, that enfocing access control / policing as you
> called it has a performance hit as the machine (the Python vm)
> has to perform checks each time members of an object are accessed.
All I can say to that is, "He who bares his mind, soon gets to the naked
More information about the Python-list