On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:05:32 -0800, Russ P. wrote: > On Jan 14, 10:40 pm, "James Mills" <prolo...@shortcircuit.net.au> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michele >> Simionato<michele.simion...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> (...) >> >> > There are lots of Python developers (and most of the core developers) >> > that think the OO community is wrong about enforced encapsulation. >> > Personally, I think in a few years everybody will realize the mistake >> > of enforced encapsulation and that the OO definition in the Wikipedia >> > page will be changed. Even if not, Wikipedia definitions does not >> > matter much, everybody has his own idea of what OO means, and the >> > Python definition is good as any other. Don't get pissed off on >> > words. >> >> Amen! The first thing said right in this entire thread! (one of) >> >> --JamesMills > > Wait a minute. Aren't the guy who just took me to task about the > definition of functional programming? So the definition of functional > programming is written in stone, but the definition of OO programming is > written in smoke?
Be fair -- James just admitted that everything he's written in this thread is wrong. If Michele's post was, and I quote James, "the first thing said right in this entire thread", then obviously everything James wrote previously was wrong. *wink* -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
