10.10.18 05:12, Benjamin Peterson пише:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018, at 17:14, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 9, 2018, at 16:21, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 10:26:50AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
My feeling is that limiting it to strings is fine, but checking those
strings for resembling identifiers is pointless and wasteful.
Sure. The question is, do we have to support uses where people
intentionally smuggle non-identifier strings as keys via **kwargs?
I would not be in favor of that. I think it doesn’t make sense to be
able to smuggle those in via **kwargs when it’s not supported by
Python’s grammar/syntax.
Can anyone think of a situation where it would be advantageous for an
implementation to reject non-identifier string kwargs? I can't.
I can. The space of identifiers is smaller than the space of all
strings. We need just 6 bits per character for ASCII identifiers and 16
bits per character for Unicode identifiers. We could use a special kind
of strings for more compact representation of identifiers. It may be
even possible to encode all identifiers used in the stdlib and in the
program as a tagged 64-bit pointer. Currently dict has specialized code
for string keys, it could have specialization for identifiers (used only
for keyword arguments, instance dicts, etc). Argument parsing code can
also utilize the fact that a special hash for short identifiers doesn't
have collizions and compare just hashes.
All this looks fantastic, but I would not close doors for future
optimizations.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
