Oops, obviously I meant:
def plusone(i: int[1:1_000_000_000]):
return i+1
random.seed(42)
for n in range(1_000_000):
plusone(random.randint(1, 1_000_000_001))
Or a zillion other things. I can construct orbitals of Mandelbrot set that
may or may not be bounded. Or bounds that depend on the twin prime
conjecture. Or whatever. Mersenne Twister is just a non-obvious calculation
that we have convenient functions for.
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020, 1:28 AM David Mertz <me...@gnosis.cx> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2020, 1:12 AM Steven D'Aprano
>
>> Static languages often check what
>> bounds they can at compile time, and optionally insert bound checking
>> runtime code for ambiguous places.
>
>
> Yep. That's an assert, or it's moral equivalent.
>
> Here's a deterministic program using the hypothetical new feature.
>
> def plusone(i: int[1:1_000_000_000]):
> return i+1
>
> random.seed(42)
> for n in range(1_000_000):
> random.randint(1, 1_000_000_001)
>
> Is this program type safe? Tell me by static analysis of Mersenne Twister.
>
> Or if you want to special case the arguments to randint, will, lots of
> things. Let's say a "random" walk on the integer number line where each
> time through the loop increments or decrements some (deterministic but hard
> to calculate) amount. After N steps are we within certain bounds?
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/SST7J7IVHW5ZWVKJSROIVBB5EEJVNT4B/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
