On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:08:13 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Demian Brecht <demianbre...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> A single underscore semantically means private. A double underscore >> will name mangle the function such that it's only accessible strictly >> by name through the class that it's define in. Note that you *can* >> still access it if you understand how name mangling works. Nothing in >> Python is truly private. > > I tend to view name mangling as being more for avoiding internal > attribute collisions in complex inheritance structures than for > designating names as private.
Really? I tend to view name mangling as a waste of time, and complex inheritance structures as something to avoid. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
