|
 |
Darren New escreveu:
> Warp wrote:
>> nemesis <nam### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>>>> Ok, "written agreement" then, if you want to nitpick. Not much
>>>> difference.
>>>> Still not enforced nor sanity-checked by anyone or anything.
>>
>>> Here is where Larry Wall's quote really applies. ;)
>>
>> Since when have code sanity checks become a bad thing?
>
> When they become something to work around, rather than a help to the
> programmer. If you need to go read the source code of the module you're
> accessing to figure out how to get to the private variables, it's no
> longer a "code sanity check" IMO.
Err... I think here I'll have to agree with Warp. Why would you try to
bypass the "code sanity checks" and all the paranoid safety devices to
access something you shouldn't be accessing in the first place?
This thread has long derailed into something quasi-metaphysical... :P
My final word here is: to have modularity you don't need all the traps,
contraption devices and alarmist chainballs with all the barroque syntax
associated. All you need is to agree to use only what a module provides
you. It's your choice to be dumb enough or a smartass h4x0r and rip the
contract just to show you can.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
