From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2009-04-14T21:42:34+09:00
Subject: Re: double underscore nomenclature in Python

2009/4/14 Mark Thomas <mark@thomaszone.com>:
> On Apr 13, 8:04 pm, Todd Benson <caduce...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So, I'm stuck re-engineering some dreadful Python library code into
>> Ruby (and I mean terrible, a mish-mash of different clashing
>> programming paradigms -- inheritance, delegation, etc. severely
>> intertwined all over, ugghh), and I came across Python's use of these
>> double underscore methods (__hook_method__.  I'm a Python virgin; so
>> sue me.  Never learned Perl, either).
>>
>> I'm curious as to why Ruby unintentionally keeps these type of things
>> less obvious.  I've seen many questions on this group concerning #puts
>> using an object's #to_s to display itself.  Don't get me wrong; it
>> doesn't bother me at all, but I've run across a few newbies that
>> struggle with this type of "hidden" guru knowledge (It's surely not
>> hidden, but not easy to discover either; sort of like a live
>> Architeuthis).
>
> Python uses __method_name to denote private methods (not enforced,
> just a convention). Ruby has keywords 'private' and 'protected'.
>
> Python uses __method_name__ with leading and trailing underscores for
> special system functions with pre-defined behavior. Like __init__()
> where ruby uses 'initialize'.
>
> Python has certain underscore methods for operator overloading; you
> define __add__() to overload '+'. Whereas in Ruby, you simply define
> the '+' method.
>
> I'm not sure how this equates to hidden guru knowledge. Ruby makes
> more sense to me in these situations.

+1

Todd had a nice summary statement included in his first posting: "keep
it laid back and just be firm with people about reading the docs". :-)

Kind regards

robert


-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end