On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:05:11 -0600, Skip Montanaro <skip@[...].com> 
wrote:

> 
>     Russell> My understanding is that a double underscore is required for
>     Russell> Python to automagically mangle the name. On the other hand, two
>     Russell> postings now suggest that a single underscore is sufficient.
> 
>     Russell> If double underscore is required, then it seems to me this is a
>     Russell> very common misconception that a single is sufficient. It might
>     Russell> be worth changing.
> 
> A double leading underscore is requred to coax Python into mangling an
> attribute.  I think a lot of people use a single underscore as a simple cue
> for themselves and other programmers that an attribute isn't meant to be
> part of the public interface without messing up the actual name, so it can
> be used easily in subclasses.

heh... so:

C++::private == Python."__*"
C++::protected == Python."_[a-zA-Z]*"
C++::public == Python."[a-zA-Z]*"

;)

-peter
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list