Does Python really follow its philosophy of "Readability counts"?

R

Russ P.

So why don't you? Why don't you set up a local command that does it
for you? Why don't you add the check to your repo check in? Why don't
you extend the object class in your site.py to provide the data
protection you want? Why don't you enforce the use of that site.py
across whatever multi-developer Python environment you're
participating in? (You are -actually- working in such an environment,
right, not just wasting our time in pointless conjecture?)

Why don't YOU do SOMETHING other than insist that the community
provide the solution for you?

I always thought this was the major advantage of Python, that so much
effort could be offloaded from the language to third party libraries.
If there is such an urgent itch-to-scratch for data protection, where
are the libs that provide such? There's a lot of funky stuff you can
do with metaclasses.


You keep saying this and you keep replying. You keep making outlandish
statements and then get angry when people question you. I'm sorry that
using synonyms for words you've written seems to anger you so much.
Have you stopped to consider that maybe it's that very anger which is
rendering you unable to entertain other people's arguments in this
thread? That's my polite way of saying "you're an arrogant and
condescending prick", by the way, just so there's no confusion here.

You are the one who pulled the word "trivial" out of your rear end and
claimed that I had said it, when I had said nothing of the sort,
loser.

Let me explain, moron. I don't need enforced data hiding for the
prototype I am working on now, because it's only a prototype that will
be converted into another more suitable language for the end product.
I am just interested in the idea of someday being able to go directly
from prototype to end product in Python. It's not an immediate need,
but a long-term concern. Can you comprehend that, genius?

But I doubt it will ever come to pass, because it is clear that much
of the Python community has no clue about what is required for large-
scale, safety-critical software engineering.

If people here said that Python just shouldn't worry about that
domain, that would be fair enough. But three or four people on this
thread have claimed now that Python is perfectly suitable for any
project, no matter the size or the safety criticality. The idea that
someone that clueless could actually be in a position to make such a
choice for a real system someday is, frankly, a bit frightening.
 
R

Russ P.

I'm sorry Russ, but you insult my friend you die.
You are -in fact- the moron here. I only wish my good friend
and software engineering professor were here to laugh
at this stupidly funny thread.

Please stop replying.

I die? That sounds like a threat. I should report you for that, loser.
Are you going to stalk me now, loser?

Oh, and does your software engineering professor agree with you that
Python is perfectly suitable for any safety-critical system, no matter
how large? That would be interesting to know.
 
J

James Mills

Let me explain, moron. I don't need enforced data hiding for the
prototype I am working on now, because it's only a prototype that will
be converted into another more suitable language for the end product.
I am just interested in the idea of someday being able to go directly
from prototype to end product in Python. It's not an immediate need,
but a long-term concern. Can you comprehend that, genius?

And you're seriously going to sit there in your fancy office
and state that Python isn't suitable ? You're stupider than
we give you credit for. But that's okay - because although you
"claim" to be a Software Engineer (I don't believe you) - you
probably have no idea about Process, Code Review,
Unit Testing, Z, ...
But I doubt it will ever come to pass, because it is clear that much
of the Python community has no clue about what is required for large-
scale, safety-critical software engineering.

I guarantee that this is not the case, only that those that
actually -do- use python for large scale projects or even mission
critical or safety critical systems probably can't be bothered to
waste their time with the likes of you.
If people here said that Python just shouldn't worry about that
domain, that would be fair enough. But three or four people on this
thread have claimed now that Python is perfectly suitable for any
project, no matter the size or the safety criticality. The idea that
someone that clueless could actually be in a position to make such a
choice for a real system someday is, frankly, a bit frightening.

http://www.google.com/

--JamesMills
 
J

James Mills

I die? That sounds like a threat. I should report you for that, loser.
Are you going to stalk me now, loser?

It's an expression you fool.
Oh, and does your software engineering professor agree with you that
Python is perfectly suitable for any safety-critical system, no matter
how large? That would be interesting to know.

Actually - in case you are perfectly unaware - programming
languages -do not- bare meaning to such systems nor have
an impact on their suitability or unsuitability.

Have you ever developed a system with 0 defects ?
If you have not, go away.
Have you ever developed a system that is mathematically sound ?
If you have not, go away.
And can you -actually- prove that any of your system are -correct- ?
.... ditto ...

--JamesMills
 
P

Paul Rubin

James Mills said:
I guarantee that this is not the case, only that those that
actually -do- use python for large scale projects or even mission
critical or safety critical systems

Do they exist?
 
P

Paul Rubin

James Mills said:
Actually - in case you are perfectly unaware - programming
languages -do not- bare meaning to such systems nor have
an impact on their suitability or unsuitability.

Er, who do you think you are trying to fool, saying things like that?
Maybe just yourself.
Have you ever developed a system with 0 defects ?
If you have not, go away.
Have you ever developed a system that is mathematically sound ?
If you have not, go away.
And can you -actually- prove that any of your system are -correct- ?
... ditto ...

http://compcert.inria.fr/doc/index.html (no, I didn't work on this).

Care to attempt something comparable in Python?
 
A

alex23

[...more invective and avoiding of questions snipped...]
Let me explain, moron. I don't need enforced data hiding for the
prototype I am working on now, because it's only a prototype that will
be converted into another more suitable language for the end product.
I am just interested in the idea of someday being able to go directly
from prototype to end product in Python. It's not an immediate need,
but a long-term concern. Can you comprehend that, genius?

Can I comprehend that you don't even have an immediate need and are
instead actively engaging in online onanism? Absolutely.

Didn't even have to call you a moron to demonstrate it, either.
 
J

James Mills

Er, who do you think you are trying to fool, saying things like that?
Maybe just yourself.

Paul unless you can prove otherwise, refuting my statement
is useless. Claiming that Python may or may not be suitable
for safety critical systems or large scale systems is unfounded.

--JaemsMills
 
P

Paul Rubin

James Mills said:
Paul unless you can prove otherwise, refuting my statement
is useless. Claiming that Python may or may not be suitable
for safety critical systems or large scale systems is unfounded.

"Programming languages -do not- bare meaning to such systems nor have
an impact on their suitability or unsuitability" (I presume you mean
"bear" not "bare") is a far stronger and stupider statement than one
about Python's suitability or lack thereof. Most informed users would
agree that Python is more suitable than some languages for that sort
of application and less suitable than others. Only a fool would
propose that all languages are equally suitable.
 
J

James Mills

"Programming languages -do not- bare meaning to such systems nor have
an impact on their suitability or unsuitability" (I presume you mean
"bear" not "bare") is a far stronger and stupider statement than one
about Python's suitability or lack thereof. Most informed users would
agree that Python is more suitable than some languages for that sort
of application and less suitable than others. Only a fool would
propose that all languages are equally suitable.

Yes I meant "bear" - bite me.

I never did say that python -is- suitable for
all applications or that all languages are suitable
for all purposes.

However, (others that are) claiming that Python
-is not- suitable because python does not
have XYZ feature is equally as foolish.

Who's to say that Python is not just as suitable
for the systems on-board a Boeing-747 then C++ ?

--JamesMills
 
R

Russ P.

Can I comprehend that you don't even have an immediate need and are
instead actively engaging in online onanism? Absolutely.

So anyone thinking beyond an "immediate need" is "engaging in online
onanism"?

Let's see. How long ago did the Python community start thinking about
Python 3?

So I guess they're all a bunch of jerkoffs, eh?
 
A

alex23

But I doubt it will ever come to pass, because it is clear that much
of the Python community has no clue about what is required for large-
scale, safety-critical software engineering.

Okay, let me try a less snippy approach. How do you feel about
metaclass techniques such as this one by Carl Banks?

http://code.activestate.com/recipes/573442/

This is pretty much what I had in mind when I said before that I
believed such concerns could be addressed externally of the
interpreter. Thankfully I thought to check Activestate before knocking
up my own as proof-of-concept :)

With Python 2.6/3.0 Carl's code could be easily (almost said
'trivially'...) extended to support the new __dir__ special method to
exclude anything marked as private from the dir() results.
 
R

Russ P.

I never did say that python -is- suitable for
all applications or that all languages are suitable
for all purposes.

But you did make some rather outlandish statements. I had written
this:
I suggest you call Boeing and tell them that encapsulation is more
trouble than it's worth for their 787 flight software. But please
don't do it if you ever wish to work for them, because you will be
proving conclusively that you don't have a clue about the kind of
software systems they produce.

And you wrote this little gem in reply:

I am 100% confident that those same systems could be
well written in a language such as Python and would very
likely end up being much smaller and more manageable.
 
J

James Mills

But you did make some rather outlandish statements. I had written
this:


And you wrote this little gem in reply:

I am 100% confident that those same systems could be
well written in a language such as Python and would very
likely end up being much smaller and more manageable.

And I completely stand by this.

--JamesMills
 
P

Paul Rubin

James Mills said:
Who's to say that Python is not just as suitable
for the systems on-board a Boeing-747 then C++ ?

"Today, Boeing uses about 500,000 lines of Ada to fly its commercial
747 400 in subsystem components, critical certification, and human
safety features. Two of the three largest systems on the 747, or 43
percent of the executable bytes, are written in Ada. The software is
FAA certified." (http://archive.adaic.com/docs/flyers/commapps.html)

Is the third component in C++? That is scary, if it does anything
important.
 
R

Russ P.

Okay, let me try a less snippy approach. How do you feel about
metaclass techniques such as this one by Carl Banks?

http://code.activestate.com/recipes/573442/

This is pretty much what I had in mind when I said before that I
believed such concerns could be addressed externally of the
interpreter. Thankfully I thought to check Activestate before knocking
up my own as proof-of-concept :)

With Python 2.6/3.0 Carl's code could be easily (almost said
'trivially'...) extended to support the new __dir__ special method to
exclude anything marked as private from the dir() results.

Looks interesting. If it can somehow be integrated into the language
as full-fledged feature, then I'd say it has potential. As I said
before, I am not looking for a hack or a quick fix. I am interested in
well-engineered data hiding that is fully supported as part of the
language. But I certainly appreciate Mr. Banks effort whether it ever
reaches that level or not.

[I am a bit confused though, because I seem to recall that Mr. Banks
claimed earlier in this thread that enforced data hiding is useless.]
 
P

Paul Rubin

alex23 said:
Okay, let me try a less snippy approach. How do you feel about
metaclass techniques such as this one by Carl Banks?

http://code.activestate.com/recipes/573442/

Does the metaclass prevent reaching into the __dict__ in an instance?

Also, attribute protection is just a tiny aspect. The high assurance
community really wants as much static verification as it can possibly
get. Python doesn't really lend itself to that.
 
J

James Mills

"Today, Boeing uses about 500,000 lines of Ada to fly its commercial
747 400 in subsystem components, critical certification, and human
safety features. Two of the three largest systems on the 747, or 43
percent of the executable bytes, are written in Ada. The software is
FAA certified." (http://archive.adaic.com/docs/flyers/commapps.html)

You wouldn't happen to have a source for this information would you ?
And this (if true) hardly suprises me as Ada is one of
the most rigorous and strictest languages I have ever
used.

Still...

--JamesMills
 
J

James Mills

Looks interesting. If it can somehow be integrated into the language
as full-fledged feature, then I'd say it has potential. As I said
before, I am not looking for a hack or a quick fix. I am interested in
well-engineered data hiding that is fully supported as part of the
language. But I certainly appreciate Mr. Banks effort whether it ever
reaches that level or not.

Then -don't- use python. Use some other boring
language. (!@#$!@#)

--JamesMills
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,299
Messages
2,571,546
Members
48,307
Latest member
LilaSumsum

Latest Threads

Top