On Jul 2, 2010, at 12:28 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > This question was inspired by something asked on #python today. Consider > it a hypothetical, not a serious proposal. > > We know that many semantic errors in Python lead to runtime errors, e.g. > 1 + "1". If an implementation rejected them at compile time, would it > still be Python? E.g. if the keyhole optimizer raised SyntaxError (or > some other exception) on seeing this: > > def f(): > return 1 + "1" > > instead of compiling something which can't fail to raise an exception, > would that still be a legal Python implementation?
I'd say "no". Python has defined semantics in this situation: a TypeError is raised. To me, this seems akin to a keyhole optimizer arbitrarily deciding that raise TypeError() should cause the compiler to abort. If this type of expression were common, it would be within the rights of, for example, a Python JIT to generate a fast path through 'f' that wouldn't bother to actually invoke its 'int' type's '__add__' method, since there is no possible way for a Python program to tell the difference, since int.__add__ is immutable. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com