"Paul Robinson" <paul.robinson at businesscollaborator.com> wrote in message news:mailman.986302445.8830.python-list at python.org... > > > Alex Martelli wrote: > > > > "Alex Shindich" <shindich at itginc.com> wrote in message > > news:mailman.986255463.27488.python-list at python.org... > > > >in C++, one normally uses _private_ inheritance for this specific purpose > > > There is nothing private in Python. There is "__" name mangling of course, > > > but that is it. > > > > Exactly. In particular, '__' name mangling does not apply to inheritance. > > What exactly did you mean by that? That there is no "__ name mangling" to give the effect of private inheritance, as mentioned in the very first line above. Names of attributes starting with __ do get mangled the same way no matter what inheritance is going to happen or not happen, of course; but this mangling concept in no way applies to _inheritance itself_, leaving no Python way to express "private inheritance". The context, I remind you, was whether it was a good idea to distinguish "implementing an interface" vs "using another class in one's implementation", two concepts that C++ somewhat merges and confuses (but sort-of-separates again by using _private_ inheritance to express 'implemented-in-terms-of'). Alex
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4