Barry Warsaw schrieb: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Dec 19, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> On 12/19/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Georg Brandl wrote: >>> >>>> so what about id() and intern(). Care to pronounce? >>> >>> moving/removing id()? please don't do that; id(obj) and type(obj) >>> are >>> essential tools for learning object semantics, and should be >>> trivial to >>> access and use. >> >> Right. I tend to agree with Fredrik about id(). I'm not so sure about >> intern() -- IMO its use is rare enough that the move would affect very >> little code; I'm seeking validation of this. If nobody speaks up about >> it, moving intern() would be okay with me. > > You don't want to get rid of 'interning' (e.g. PyString_Intern*()) > but just the intern() built-in? We actually use both, but we use the > C API call much more frequently than the built-in call. I don't > think it would be too painful for us if intern() was removed, but > OTOH if it was stuck in some Python internals module (sys?) and not > kept as a built-in, that would be fine too.
Yes, exactly that is proposed: sys.intern() instead of intern(). Georg _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
