Russ P. a écrit :
On Jan 23, 4:57 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
42.desthuilli...@websiteburo.invalid> wrote:
Russ P. a écrit :
As I said before, if you have the source code you can always change
private attributes to public in a pinch if the language enforces
encapsulation.
And then have to maintain a fork. No, thanks.
For crying out loud, how many private attributes do you need to
access?
May I remind you that this is an hypothetical use case ?
If it's a dozen, then you and your library developer are
obviously not on the same page. If it's one or two, then it's hardly a
"fork." Just take note of the one or two places where you needed to
remove the access restriction and you're done.
Yeah, fine. And doing it each and any release. A fork is a fork is a fork...
But if you are working on a team project, you can't
change the code that another member of a team checks in.
Why on earth couldn't I change the code of another member of my team if
that code needs changes ? The code is the whole team's ownership.
OK, fine, you can change the code of another member of the team.
No. I can change the *team's* code. Please *read*. "team's ownership",
ok ? Or do I have to spell it out loud ? TEAM'S OWNERSHIP. Uh. You get
the message, now ?
Are
you going to check with him first, or just do it?
<despair>I give up.</despair>
(snip)
My my my. If you don't trust your programmers, then indeed, don't use
Python. What can I say (and what do I care ?). But once again, relying
on the language's access restriction to manage *security* is, well, kind
of funny, you know ?
Are you seriously saying that if you were managing the production of a
major financial software package with hundreds of developers, you
would just "trust" them all to have free access to the most sensitive
and critical parts of the program? Now *that's*, well, kind of funny,
you know?
A remote web service - for example - is a far better blackbox when it
comes to this kind of "sensitive and critical parts". If I can't trust
someone wrt/ "this" part of the code, then he won't even have it as a
binary package. Period.
Would you give all those developers your password to get into the
system? No? Wait a minute ... you mean you wouldn't "trust" them with
your password? But what about "openness"? Are you some sort of fascist
or what?
Goodwin point. You loose. Good bye again, Mr P.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
