On 10/25/05, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would it make sense to have the constructors own their arguments even > when they fail? That is, have them free the arguments if they can't > constructor an object? Or have a variant of the constructor functions > that does behave this way?
This can't work if the parameter is an asdl_seq, since we don't know if the sequence could contain stmts, exprs, comprehensions, etc. I kinda like the idea, but I think arenas will be better in the long run. I think using PyObjects might be too slow, but I'd love to be proved wrong. It would make the Python interface much easier. n _______________________________________________ Compiler-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/compiler-sig
