Steven D'Aprano writes: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 06:51:54AM -0500, James Johnson wrote: > > > When an amateur develops code incorrectly, s/he sometimes ends up with a > > code object that doesn’t run because of intermediate compiler > > optimizations. > > If that happens, that's a bug in the compiler. Optimizations should > never change the meaning of code.
This isn't quite true. Languages (mostly low-level) frequently leave behavior of legal syntax partly undefined in order to allow efficient implementation on various architectures, or because it's unclear how it will be used in the future (function annotations, I be lookin' at you!) > If you have an example of this, where the compiler optimization changes > the meaning of Python code beyond what is documented, please raise a bug > report for it. OK, you've mostly taken care of the letter of my comment. But I still think it's worth pointing out that the documentation is frequently incomplete for various reasons. > But I doubt you will find any, because Python performs very, very few > optimizations of the sort you are referring to. True, although it might in the future. _______________________________________________ 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/QEHF3IDM24LVD6PZY7OF4YJFM3FU75T3/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
