On 5/5/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> In general, I don't think it's a good idea to have literals > >> turn into mutable objects, since literals are normally perceived > >> as being constant. > > > > Does that mean you want list literals to be immutable too? > > > > lst = ['a', 'b', 'c'] > > lst.append('d') # raises an error? > > That's not a literal, it's a display. The difference is that > a literal denotes the same object every time it is executed. > A display creates a new object every time it is executed. > (another difference is that a display is a constructed thing > which may contain runtime-computed components, unlike a > literal). > > So if bytes are mutable and also have source-level > representation, they should be displays, not literals.
So is having mutable bytes just a matter of calling them "byte displays" instead of "byte literals" or does that also require changing something in the back end? STeVe -- I'm not *in*-sane. Indeed, I am so far *out* of sane that you appear a tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity. --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com