On Jun 2, 5:11 pm, Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Russ P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I also realize, by the way, that Python allows a client of a class to > > define a new class member from completely outside the class > > definition. Obviously, that cannot be declared private. > > This is bogus about 95% of the time though. For the cases where it is > really desired, I think it's best to require the target class to be > enable it specifically somehow, maybe by inheriting from a special > superclass. That could let the compiler statically resolve member > lookups the rest of the time.
It did seem a bit odd to me when I realized that you can add data members (or even a "methods") to a class from completely outside the class definition. That can be risky, of course, and as you suggest, perhaps it shouldn't even be allowed by default. I usually find that it's safer to initialize in the constructor all (or nearly all) of the data members that will be needed in a class. If I need a list that will be populated later, for example, I reserve the name with an empty list in the constructor. Then, if for some reason the list gets accessed before it is populated, I don't get an exception. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
