sturlamolden wrote: > On Dec 12, 5:13 pm, Steve Holden <st...@holdenweb.com> wrote: > >>> It should be the tuple's __setitem__ that was invoked here, not >>> __iadd__, or the parser is faulty. >> OK, so now you are proposing to alter the parser, and possibly the >> implementation of the INPLACE_ADD opcode in eval.c, so can you give us >> the patch for those, please? > > What? Take a look at the code again: > > mytuple[0] += 1 > > should never attempt an __iadd__ on mytuple. > > A sane parser would see this as: > > tmp = mytuple.__getitem__(0) > tmp = tmp.__iadd__(1) > mytuple.__setitem__(0, tmp) # should this always raise an exception? > > >> Discussion of such behavior as a "bug" is also pejorative, since the >> current semantics are the way they are by design. > > Right, this bug is by design. You learned that phrase from a guy in > Redmond? > "It's not a bug, it's a feature" predates Microsoft by several years.
If I say you are ugly, that doesn't make it true. Neither does your calling this a bug make it a bug. The fact is that Python doesn't behave the way you want it to. If your friend doesn't want to do what you do, does that make it a bug in his behavior. You're being a little juvenile here. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list