On 6/27/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bad Case Option (5) -- ad hoc mixture > ------------------------------------- > > Pick an arbitrary set of rules, and follow it. > > Guido is currently leaning towards this, with the rules being "freeze > at definition", raise for unhashable, ignore later changes, undecided > on overlapping ranges. > > The disadvantage is that people can "cheat" with non-constant > expressions. Sometimes, this will work out great. Sometimes it will > lead to nasty non-localized bugs. We have to explain exactly which > cheats are allowed, and that explanation could get byzantine.
A solution that is often offered in situations like this: Pychecker (or something like it) can do a much more thorough check. It should be easy for Pychecker to keep track of the constancy of variables. IMO my proposal has no cheats. It has well-defined semantics. Maybe not the semantics you'd like to see, but without ESP built into the compiler that's impossible. If you stick to the simple rule "constants only" then you won't see any semantics surprises. Just stay away from anything where you're not sure whether it's really a constant, and you'll be fine. If on the other hand you want to explore the boundaries of the semantics, we'll give you one simple rule, and you can verify that that rule is indeed all there is. -- --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
