Op 2005-11-26, Steven D'Aprano schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:55:07 +0000, Antoon Pardon wrote: > >> Suppose I have the following code. >> >> from module import __take_care__ >> >> __private_detail__ = ... >> >> I now have two variable that are flaged the same way, but they are not. > > No, you have two names written using a poor naming convention.
Well if it is a poor naming convention, why react to me, and not to Mike who was defending this poor naming convention? > __name__ should be used only for Python's special methods. > >> __take_care__ is a private variable from an other module which I should >> use with extreme care not to break the other package. > > Python doesn't do any special treatment of __name or __name__ from > modules. The only information hiding techniques Python enforces are that > module._name (single leading underscore) is not imported by "from module > import *", and class.__name (double leading underscore) is mangled to > class._Class__name. We were not talkin about special treatment by python. We were talking about conventions to communicate purpose to other readers of the software. >> It are other modules that should take special care if they >> should choose to import this variable. > > I'm not sure what the difference is. If there is a difference, why are you > using the same naming convention for different sorts of names ("private > module variable" and "private module data"). If there is no difference, I > don't understand the point of your example. Well it seems you didn't seem to understand the point of my answer. Maybe you should first reread the article I responded too. -- Antoon Pardon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list