On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:51:31 -0400 Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > On Jul 14, 2013, at 06:11 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > >Private interfaces > > PEP 8 does say: > > _single_leading_underscore: weak "internal use" indicator. E.g. from M > import * does not import objects whose name starts with an underscore. > > I'm in favor of making this a stronger recommendation, but I have a small > semantic quibble. Instead of "private interface" it should be "non-public > interface". The two aren't quite the same thing; for example, often > single-leading underscores are used for methods that subclasses are supposed > to override, e.g. akin to "protected" in C++.
C++ doesn't have a monopoly over the definition of "private". > Besides, Python doesn't really have any strong notion of privateness, so > saying "non-public" means "just because you can, doesn't mean you should". If it doesn't have any notion of privateness, then it can't have a notion of "publicness" either. If you really want another word (I am personally fine with "private"), "internal" it should be. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
