[Python-Dev] PEP 558: Defined semantics for locals()
Paul Moore
p.f.moore at gmail.com
Sun May 26 07:53:42 EDT 2019
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Sun May 26 07:53:42 EDT 2019
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 558: Defined semantics for locals()
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] [SPAM?] Re: PEP 558: Defined semantics for locals()
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, 26 May 2019 at 12:23, Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 8:07 PM Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 08:44:33AM +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > > > > From my reading of the description, you could also "assert a is b" - > > > is that correct? > > > > Yes, that's already the behaviour. > > > > py> def demo(): > > ... a = locals() > > ... b = locals() > > ... print(a is b) > > ... > > py> demo() > > True > > > > Sure, but this PEP is all about defining things that weren't > previously defined, so I wanted to clarify intent rather than current > behaviour. +1 on the PEP being explicit over this. Even though it's current behaviour, it's surprising and making a clear and definitive statement that the PEP intends to make the behaviour part of the language definition and not just a CPython detail, is IMO worthwhile. Paul
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 558: Defined semantics for locals()
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] [SPAM?] Re: PEP 558: Defined semantics for locals()
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list