[ale] Py[h]hon syntax (sic)

[Benjamin Scherrey]

Michael,

    Actually python does have a mechanism, albeit a big odd, for making 
data private but it is not standard python practice to use getter/setter 
methods. Indeed, its generally poor practice in most languages but I see 
a lot of poorly written C++ & Java strewn with it. There is the 
occasional need for these accessors in some languages but python has 
gone even further and completely eliminated their need by explicit 
support for properties. Properties allows your class users to use syntax 
just like they were accessing the data members directly but actually 
routes the access through methods in the class that validate, 
manipulate, or generally enforce the interface to that data. Indeed, 
through this method one can define read-only (and write-only!) 
properties giving your data further protection. This provides for better 
enforcement of encapsulation whereas in most cases where you see 
getter/setter methods, you've actually identified a violation of 
encapsulation and poor design.

    -- Ben Scherrey

Michael Hirsch wrote:

> <snip>
>
>No real comments, just a relevant question to the pythonistas out there.
>I notice in this code that there are accessor methods for all the
>variables.  This is technically unnecessary since python doesn't have
>private fields like java or C++.  However, perhaps it is good style--in
>Java it would be.  So, my question is whether this is the preferred way
>to expose fields, or is it considered okay to just access the fields
>directly?
>
>Michael
>  
>
> <snip>
>
>
>  
>