On Tue, 21 Jun 2022 at 13:07, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 03:15:32AM +0100, Rob Cliffe wrote: > > > Why do people keep obscuring the discussion of a PEP which addresses > > Problem A by throwing in discussion of the (unrelated) Problem B? > > (Chris, and I, have stated, ad nauseam, that these *are* unrelated > > problems. > > Chris says: > > "Even if Python does later on grow a generalized lazy evaluation > feature, it will only change the *implementation* of late-bound > argument defaults, not their specification." > > So you are mistaken that they are unrelated. >
*facepalm* I'm not offering you a way to put C code in your Python function defaults. However, there is a large amount of C code in the implementation of them, at least in my reference implementation. So I guess the features of late-bound defaults and C code in function defaults aren't unrelated either, and I should stop working on this and start working on that. Seriously? Are you unable to distinguish implementation from specification? What are you even doing on this mailing list? ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/WGGAMLKO2RCNBRCWR3UPDOEY4K22VAWT/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
