On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 22:42 -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Ignacio Morelle <shadowm2...@gmail.com>: > > We are vulnerable anywhere where we don't coordinate our work or > > settle upon a common coding style, and a good *design style*. That's > > almost everywhere unfortunately, but I still can't find a good reason > > to blame C++. > > You are mistaken if you think I am blaming C++ specifically in this > discussion. The defect attractors I am most worried about would be > just as severe in any attempt to do what Wesnoth does in *any* > language with pointers and fixed-extent types. > > I can find plenty of things to curse C++ about, but that's > a different rant. > > > And a language which does not offer data-type enforcement to me is > > just scaring, which is why it took me so long to learn Perl: > > unwillingness to surrender to type unsafety. > > See my previous about "type safety" being a poor substitute > for explicit contracts and invariants. >
Python's slots mechanism can be used as a form of contract interfaces. They also limit the dynamic nature of class instances which can address classes of bugs where a typo goes unnoticed. I will tell you, many dislike the use of slots and I have very limited experience with them. Just the same, take a look at them and see if you guys want to even bring Python's slot mechanism to the table for discussion. http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#__slots__ -- Greg Copeland <gtcopel...@gmail.com>
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
