Moshe Zadka wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > I think Python 3000 ought to use totally static scoping. That will > > make it possible to do optimize code using built-in names! > > Isn't that another way of saying you want the builtin names to be > part of the language definition? Part of today's method advantages > is that new builtins can be added without any problems. +1. Wouldn't it be more Python-like to provide the compiler with a set of known-to-be-static global name bindings ? A simple way of avoiding optimizations like these: def f(x, str=str): return str(x) + '!' would then be to have the compiler lookup "str" in the globals() passed to it and assign the found value to the constants of the function, provided that "str" appears in the list of known-to-be-static global name bindings (perhaps as optional addition parameter to compile() with some reasonable default in sys.staticsymbols). -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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