2 ms·

> Hidden monkeypatching isn’t how we do things. The original authors of several codebases I've been saddled with over the years would disagree with you. This

> Hidden monkeypatching isn’t how we do things. The original authors of several codebases I've been saddled with over the years would disagree with you. This is Python and you a peasant. Yes most of the time the snake along the road is a snake, but occasionally it's a Basilisk waiting to destroy you with it's gaze. Knowing this, you the weary traveler, carry inconvenient tools such as mirrors to protect yourself and are well versed in superstition and arcane dark arts. You never let your guard down, because yes there is magic afoot.

kstrauser 3y ago
It's not like "Zen of Python" is an inviolable law, but things that break it are not, in my opinion, "Pythonic". The top 2 aphorisms are: "Beautiful is better than ugly." I think this is ugly. It's visually appealing, but my editor doesn't know that "csvbase" is a magic symbol that selects the code path to follow. That deep ugliness outweighs any skin-deep cleverness. "Explicit is better than implicit." That sums it up. This is implicit. `pip install foo` changing runtime behavior of packages that never import foo is as implicit as it gets. From a developer's and a security engineer's point of view, I loathe that code is running simply because it exists. It's possible to do these things. I contend that it's not Pythonic, and we should not be doing them.