On Saturday, August 31, 2013 9:03:58 AM UTC+2, Gary Herron wrote:
> On 08/30/2013 11:07 PM, Fabrice Pombet
> wrote:
>
>
> ... long discussion elided ...
>
> well, look at that:
>
> a=(1,2)
> a=2+3 ->a is an object and I have changed its type and value from outside. As
> far as I am concerned this is one hell of an encapsulation violation... Could
> you do this -strictly speaking- in Java or C++?
>
>
>
>
> Yes, in fact you can do that in C++ and java:
>
>
>
> Obj1 a = ...some object...;
>
> { // new scope...
>
> Obj2 a = ...another object...;
>
> }
>
>
>
> On one line, the name 'a' is bound to one object, and later it is
> bound to another object. Your Python code is similar, binding the
> name 'a' to object (1,2) on one line and the object 5 on the next
> line. Granted, Python seems a little freer because, with it's
> dynamic typing, one doesn't need to create a new scope to rebind a
> name, but all languages with variable names allow some control over
> binding/rebinding names.
>
>
>
> But this has *nothing* at all to do with objects and encapsulation.
>
>
>
> Please don't confuse:
>
> the binding of names to objects and
>
>
>
> the existence of objects and their encapsulated behavior
>
>
> They are very different things.
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Gary Herron
> Department of Computer Science
> DigiPen Institute of Technology
> (425) 895-4418
That's interesting, can you do this in C++ or java:
class X():
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
