Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?
bruno.42.desthuilliers at websiteburo.invalid
Tue Jan 27 10:39:02 CET 2009
Russ P. a écrit :
> On Jan 26, 1:07 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
> 42.desthuilli... at websiteburo.invalid> wrote:
>> No. I can change the *team's* code. Please *read*. "team's ownership",
>> ok ? Or do I have to spell it out loud ? TEAM'S OWNERSHIP. Uh. You get
>> the message, now ?
> Team ownership doesn't necessarily mean that you can just change code
> at will.
Nope, but it surely means that I'm *not* changing "someone else's" code.
> In industry, teams usually have a leader that you need to
> check with before you can change an interface.
This is totally unrelated.
>>> Would you give all those developers your password to get into the
>>> system? No? Wait a minute ... you mean you wouldn't "trust" them with
>>> your password? But what about "openness"? Are you some sort of fascist
>>> or what?
>> Goodwin point. You loose. Good bye again, Mr P.
> You missed the point once again. In asking if you are a "fascist," I
> was *parodying* your attitude that languages with enforced access
> restrictions are for "fascists" who don't trust their co-workers or
> employees. [I don't recall if you actually used that word
I did not, and you should know better.
> or if it was
> someone else, but you did use "B&D", which carries the same general
Can't you tell the difference, really ?
> So I parodied your hyperbole,
Still not. But it's interesting to note that you consider everyone
disagreeing with you as basically the same person.
More information about the Python-list