On 6/25/06, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Georg Brandl wrote: > > Raymond Hettinger wrote: > > > five = 5 > > > eight = [8] > > > def f(x, six=6): > > > seven = 7 > > > a = static(five + 4) # this is legal > > > b = static(six + 4) # this is illegal > > > c = static(seven + 4) # this is illegal > > > d = static(eight + [4]) # this is illegal > > > > Why would the last line be illegal? > > I believe Raymond is assuming it would be illegal because it's mutable. > I don't think much has been said about whether static(<EXPR>) should be > allowed to yield a mutable value, but if we did allow that, it might > open up an avenue to much confusion. (I join the chorus of voices that > dislike the name 'static' for this feature.)
What do you think of Nick C's 'once'? > Whether or not 'eight + [4]' is allowed in 'static', it certainly > wouldn't be allowed after 'switch' or 'case' since it's unhashable. Right. But there are all sorts of objects that are compared by object identity (e.g. classes, modules, even functions) which may contain mutable components but are nevertheless "constant" for the purpose of switch or optimization. Let's not confuse this concept of constness with immutability. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
