From: Emiliano <emile@...>
Date: 2001-10-24T17:17:16+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:23155] Re: Bruce Eckel's opinion of Ruby

Rich Kilmer wrote:

> > But it still wouldn't be the default behaviour. Having class-private
> > data available publicly by default isn't correct in my book. You have
> > to choose what to make part of your public interface. IMO, of course.
> 
> In the following I am not trying to be anti-Python...just trying to set the record straight...
> 
> Regarding "private" class variables.
> 
> So...in Python you can use this:
> 
> obj.__dict__['attrName']=value
> 
> ...to get direct access to (get/set) the values of every attribute on an object.

But reading this it is immediately clear to me you are violating the
'contract' the class provides.

> In Ruby every object attribute is private and can only be accessed
> through a method...period.  Exposing the __dict__ "bag" on an object
> exposes the entire state of that object for public consumption.

Than I was mistaken in my believe that every attribute was publicly
accessible.

Emile