On Feb 2, 4:10 am, Stephen Hansen <apt.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Anyway, it doesn't matter. We're losing the point here. The point is > that language support for private access, by disallowing user access > to private data, provides an unambiguous information hiding mechanism > which encourages encapsulation. Python's approach, however, which is > only a naming convention rather than a language feature, merely TRUSTS > the programmer not to break encapsulation. And sure, if we're all good > programmers, everything will go well and we'll end up with an > organized application. But the danger is still there: at any given > time, we COULD break encapsulation! > > > I was long-winded the last time I responded to this point so no one probably > read it :)
Yes, we read it. You made good points!! Cheers, Hung -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
