On 11/22/05, Robert Wittams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why are you ignoring the whole aim of this thread? The point is to do > the *safest* thing possible *when* the developer doesn't specify > anything else. The point is when the developer wants to do something > potentially *stupid and dangerous*, *then* he needs to be explicit.
He's not ignoring it at all, he is making a very reasonable point, namely that the thinking you expose above, is never ever going to get you security. The safest thing possible, and the only thing consistent with the Python creed, is to refuse to guess and require the programmer to be explicit about his intentions. /s
