On Jan 26, 1:07 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno. 42.desthuilli...@websiteburo.invalid> wrote:
> 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 ? Team ownership doesn't necessarily mean that you can just change code at will. In industry, teams usually have a leader that you need to check with before you can change an interface. A language with enforced access restriction merely provides language support for such coordination. That was my only point. > > 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. You missed the point once again. In asking if you are a "fascist," I was *parodying* your attitude that languages with enforced access restrictions are for "fascists" who don't trust their co-workers or employees. [I don't recall if you actually used that word or if it was someone else, but you did use "B&D", which carries the same general impression.] So I parodied your hyperbole, and you dismiss me for it. Without realizing it, you just dismissed yourself, sir. Thanks for saving me the trouble. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
