On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 1:12:14 PM UTC-5, sohca...@gmail.com wrote: [...a whole lot of my quotes, snipped for bandwidth...]
@GROUP: I don't know what the heck happened in this thread, but everyone involved was having a nice respectful conversation about encapsulation, interfaces, and modules, and then BartC and Mark showed up, and the thread went off on a wild tangent. Whilst the participation of members and the CoC are important topics, i hope we put aside these petty issues, and get back to productive discussions soon. Thanks. > I don't think you'll find anyone that disagrees with you > here. > > If you're seeing a method "width", then whoever wrote that > method is a terrible programmer. Method names should > *always* contain some sort of verb. As you just said, > self-documenting names are the key to short learning > curves. > > IMO, if you intend an attribute to be read-only, then you > should use a getter, even in Python, Even though many of our fellow members would argue that this is overkill, your advice is good advice, and i strongly support this position. > and of course prefix the actual value with an underscore > to show it should not be accessed publicly. Agreed! > The only time you should see "someObject.width" is if > width is both readable and writable. Of course, Using > @property to add some logic to the setting/getting is > fine. Yes. More wonderful, and consistent, advice here. You sir, have restored my faith in humanity. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list