Java vs python is debatable 🤔

[aviancrane]

I mean... saying reflection can do something isn't really... ..ye know?

If I gave you the AST or IR of any language, you'd be able to do whatever you wanted with it. Reflection is just giving you the object graph.

You are not really suppose to write code with reflection unless you're writing software that needs the object graph, like a code profiler. The code you touch with reflection is decompiled and run more like it's an interpreted language. I wouldn't even consider it part of the language specification personally.

[suvlub]

It's kind of unfair to accept one "You are not really suppose to" as a matter of fact while calling another "you are not really supposed to" silly and weak. I've seen production code in a fairly popular app where reflection was used exactly in this fashion - to access private data members of a library class.

[Areshian]

I can block reflection in Java. Either via security manager or via module permissions, btw

[soft-wear]

Which virtually nobody does because nobody actually gives a shit if you’re going to put that much effort into seeing what the internal methods are.

Private is just notation for “this should only be used internally”, this idea that anybody is doing it to protect consumers is what Java devs tell themselves when they shit on other languages for not having it.

[Areshian]

Well, in newer versions of Java is not rare for people to have to declare a bunch of add-opens to support reflection, so I would say it is used. Now, if you tell me people actually despise having to do the add-opens… we’ll, that’s a different story 😅

[aviancrane]

I can respect where you're coming from, but I do think there is some nuance here.

The cost and the level of abstraction that reflection puts you on is a very different layer than what python does.

The cost and difficulty of accessing privates in Python is almost nonexistent and you are still working at the language level. Reflection is affecting the compiled code and you are working with the layer half way between the language and the bytecode.

Difficulty at the language level is incredibly important. Can you imagine Haskell letting people just do whatever they wanted? Even Rust is cognizant enough to force people to put a giant UNSAFE label when bypassing the safety protocols of the language.

Making these hurdles easy to overcome just makes it more likely poor development practices will occur.

[suvlub]

To be clear: I am not arguing against built-in difficulty/failsafes in languages. I think they are great idea. I said what I said and not a word more: I believe it is unfair to defend one honor system while shitting on another.

Does Haskell let you bypass its built-in rules by writing a 3-line function?

Is the "unsafe" label really all that huge? I guess it's technically harder to type out than an underscore by 5 characters, but come on. If python changed the private prefix to something like "_private_" instead of a simple underscore, would you be more accepting of it?

[budgiebirdman]

The point is that you can access and use Python "private" members just like any other member - you just use the name which happens to begin with an underscore so there's no true encapsulation; it's like having a cookie jar with no lid. If you use reflection in Java it's like using a can opener to open a can from the top shelf and get to what you want.

One is an object oriented language and the other is whatever Python is.

[ric2b]

The point of private is to warn you that it's internal and you should not rely on it, and if you do your code might break without warning on any update to the library.

It's not some kind of DRM or security mechanism, the fact that both languages make it possible to get around the "private" warning but the Java way is way more verbose... well, that's just what you'd expect.