On 4/10/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > I'm not sure how that would help. What would it mean to have a > > capability for accessing e.g. x.__class__? > > If you can somehow get a reference to the > __builtin__.classof() function, then you > have that capability, otherwise you don't. > > The key idea is that by turning potentially > dangerous things like this from attributes > into functions, access to them can be much > more easily controlled. Any function can be > withheld without the creator of the function > having had to do anything special. But you > can't withhold an attribute unless its > accessor has been designed with that in > mind.
But it does require a major cultural shift. That means backwards compatibility, and the need for users to relearn how they do things. I'm not sure I like either of those, given that these changes would affect *all* users just so that a small set of users can get the feature they want. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
