On Saturday 18 October 2003 06:33 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I don't like the trick of avoiding the copy if the refcount is one; > AFAIK it can't be done in Jython. No, but if it's only a small optimization, who cares? Anyway, the objection that these functions might be called by _C_ code who's holding the only reference to a PyObject* probably kills The Trick (particularly my hope of moving it into PySequence_List whether copysort survived or not). > I think the application area is too narrow to warrant a built-in, > *and* lists shouldn't grow two similar methods. Let's keep the > language small! Aye aye, captain. Can we dream of a standard library module of "neat hacks that don't really warrant a built-in" in which to stash some of these general-purpose, no-specific-appropriate-module, useful functions and classes? Pluses: would save some people reimplementing them over and over and sometimes incorrectly; would remove any pressure to add not-perfectly-appropriate builtins. Minuses: one more library module (the, what, 211th? doesn't seem like a biggie). Language unchanged -- just library. Pretty please? > (I know, by that argument several built-ins shouldn't exist. Well, > they might be withdrawn in 3.0; let's not add more.) "Amen and Hallelujah" to the hope of slimming language and built-ins in 3.0 (presumably the removed built-ins will go into a "legacy curiosa" module, allowing a "from legacy import *" to ease making old code run in 3.0? seems cheap & sensible). Alex
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