Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?

[Russ P.]

On Jan 20, 9:00 pm, alex23 <wuwe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2:50 pm, "Russ P." <Russ.Paie... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If pylint can check for private access violations, then in principle
> > someone could just add a run-time flag that would run pylint as a
> > preliminary step to running python. Heck, I am *not* familiar with the
> > internals of the interpreter, and even I could do that.
>
> So why don't you? Why don't you set up a local command that does it
> for you? Why don't you add the check to your repo check in? Why don't
> you extend the object class in your site.py to provide the data
> protection you want? Why don't you enforce the use of that site.py
> across whatever multi-developer Python environment you're
> participating in? (You are -actually- working in such an environment,
> right, not just wasting our time in pointless conjecture?)
>
> Why don't YOU do SOMETHING other than insist that the community
> provide the solution for you?
>
> I always thought this was the major advantage of Python, that so much
> effort could be offloaded from the language to third party libraries.
> If there is such an urgent itch-to-scratch for data protection, where
> are the libs that provide such? There's a lot of funky stuff you can
> do with metaclasses.
>
> > Your mistake for being a moron. But it seems to happen regularly,
> > doesn't it. How much more of my time are you going to waste, loser?
>
> You keep saying this and you keep replying. You keep making outlandish
> statements and then get angry when people question you. I'm sorry that
> using synonyms for words you've written seems to anger you so much.
> Have you stopped to consider that maybe it's that very anger which is
> rendering you unable to entertain other people's arguments in this
> thread? That's my polite way of saying "you're an arrogant and
> condescending prick", by the way, just so there's no confusion here.

You are the one who pulled the word "trivial" out of your rear end and
claimed that I had said it, when I had said nothing of the sort,
loser.

Let me explain, moron. I don't need enforced data hiding for the
prototype I am working on now, because it's only a prototype that will
be converted into another more suitable language for the end product.
I am just interested in the idea of someday being able to go directly
from prototype to end product in Python. It's not an immediate need,
but a long-term concern. Can you comprehend that, genius?

But I doubt it will ever come to pass, because it is clear that much
of the Python community has no clue about what is required for large-
scale, safety-critical software engineering.

If people here said that Python just shouldn't worry about that
domain, that would be fair enough. But three or four people on this
thread have claimed now that Python is perfectly suitable for any
project, no matter the size or the safety criticality. The idea that
someone that clueless could actually be in a position to make such a
choice for a real system someday is, frankly, a bit frightening.