Am 17.01.2013 17:21, schrieb Chris Barker - NOAA Federal: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Matthieu Brucher > >> Of course a += b is not the same as a = a + b. The first one modifies the >> object a, the second one creates a new object and puts it inside a. The >> behavior IS consistent. > > Exactly -- if you ask me, the bug is that Python allows "in_place" > operators for immutable objects -- they should be more than syntactic > sugar.
They are not -- the "+=" translation is well defined: the equivalents are a += b a = a.__iadd__(b) Now __iadd__ can choose to return self (for mutable objects) or a new object (for immutable objects). The confusion about immutables is simply the "usual" confusion about "=" assigning names, not variable space. > Of course, the temptation for += on regular numbers was just too much to > resist. And probably 95% of the use of +=/-= *is* with regular numbers. Georg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
