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

Luis Zarrabeitia kyrie at uh.cu
Tue Jan 27 20:40:02 CET 2009


On Tuesday 27 January 2009 02:13:50 pm Russ P. wrote:
> I suggested that maybe -- maybe! -- the versatility of Python could be
> enhanced with enforced data hiding. I was careful to say several times
> that I don't know if that can even be done in Python (with all its
> introspection and so forth). And it would always be optional, of
> course (as far as I know, no language forces anyone to declare
> anything private).

I think you still fail to see that what we are objecting is not that the 
original writer can "optionally" use the enforced data hiding (which, as 
someone pointed out before me, can be done with tools like pylint). The 
objection is about the _user_ of the library. If you don't force it into the 
_user_, how is it different from the current situation? And if you do force 
it, how can you say that it is optional?

-- 
Luis Zarrabeitia (aka Kyrie)
Fac. de Matemática y Computación, UH.
http://profesores.matcom.uh.cu/~kyrie



More information about the Python-list mailing list