STINNER Victor added the comment: > I don't like it because it adds a cumbersome code for guarding against a case > that doesn't happen in practice.
Hum, sorry, I don't understand what is the issue with adding a few addition checks in the constructor? Is it a matter of speed? > This is just unpythonic. Wait, what? I asked you to add checks to not break the Python semantics. If you want to be "Pythonic": you must support the Python semantics, so support when __getitem__, __len__, etc. are replaced. I don't understand your "unpythonic" argument. > _sre.compile() is a private function and it is called only with exact types. Right. So what is the problem with adding more sanity checks? > Even if it would called with subtypes, most subtypes don't override __len__ > and __getitem__. This restriction is too strong. It's a matter of respecting the Python semantics. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue28765> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
