On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Mark Hammond wrote: > > I think that we get 95% of the benefit without any of the > > "dangers" > > (though I don't agree with the arguments against) if we allow the > > attachment of properties only at compile time and > > disallow mutation of > > them at runtime. > > AFAIK, this would be a pretty serious change. The compiler just > generates (basically)PyObject_SetAttr() calls. There is no way in > the current runtime to differentiate between "compile time" and > "runtime" attribute references... If this was done, it would simply > be ugly hacks to support what can only be described as unpythonic in > the first place! > > [Unless of course Im missing something...] You aren't at all! Paul hit his head, or he is assuming some additional work to allow the compiler to know more. I agree with you: compilation in Python is just code execution; there is no way Python can disallow runtime changes. (from a later note, it appears he is referring to introducing "decl", which I don't think is on the table for 1.6) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4