Dieter Maurer wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote at 2006-3-14 07:23 -0500:
- Indirection and abstraction are inherently bad because they
hide things. :)
(This is a corolary of "explicit is better than implicit".)
I do not agree with this (but I also do not agree with
"explicit is better tham implicit" -- almost all activities
would become drastically more difficult if they could only be
done explicitly: walking, driving, eating, ... I am very happy
that most things, in real life and in programming work implicitly
and on an appropriate abstract level).
+1. When I learn a skill, it is at first completely explicit, and as
the skill becomes predictable and reliable, it gradually becomes
implicit. If I kept everything explicit, I would hinder myself from
building higher level skills.
So explicit is better than implicit until a sufficiently tight
abstraction comes about. Take memory management: yesterday it was
explicit (malloc/free); today it's mostly implicit (garbage collection).
Garbage collection is both an abstraction, since programmers no longer
manage memory directly, and an indirection, since programmers now use
APIs that call malloc and free. We all agree GC is good, so explicit is
definitely not always better than implicit.
To say something is bad only because it's implicit or abstract is a poor
argument, but to say something is bad because it's a leaky abstraction
is an argument that can be explored further. For example, it's not very
sensible to say implicit acquisition is bad because it's implicit, but
it is quite sensible to say it's bad because it leaks all attributes and
forces a lot of code to be aware of wrappers.
Zope3-dev mailing list