On Jun 2, 6:41 am, Carl Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are not realizing that only useful(**) thing about data hiding is > that some code has access to the data, other code does not. If you > "hide" data equally from everyone it's just a useless spelling change.
I think you're missing the point. As I see it, the primary value of data hiding is that it provides useful information on which data and methods are intended for the client and which are intended for internal use. It's like putting a front panel on a TV set with the main controls intended for the viewer. People seem to be preoccupied with whether or not the back panel of the TV is locked, but that is not the main issue. Sure, you probably want to make the back panel removable, but you don't want the viewer opening it up to change the channel, and you certainly don't want to put all the internal adjustments for factory technicians together with the controls for the end user. As far as I am concerned, the current Python method of using underscores to distinguish between internal and external methods and data is an ugly hack that goes completely against the elegance of the language in other areas. It is like a TV set with no back cover and the volume and channel controls intermingled with the factory controls. The underscores are just an afterthought like a red dot or something used to tell the TV viewer what to fiddle with. Python is a very nice language overall, but as far as I am concerned the underscore convention is a blemish. I just wish people wouldn't get so infatuated with the language that they cannot see the obvious staring them in the face. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
