Tim Daneliuk <tun...@tundraware.com> writes:
> You can get away with this because all string objects appear to point to
> common
> method objects. That is,: id("a".lower) == id("b".lower)
A side note: your use of `id' has misled you. id(X)==id(Y) is not a
perfect substitue for the X is Y. :)
"a".lower and "b".lower obviously cannot be the same object, because in
that case, how could they behave differently when called?
>>> "a".lower()
'a'
>>> "b".lower() # this should also return 'a' if "b".lower is the
# same object
'b'
Yet, id("a".lower) == id("b".lower) evaluates as True.
What happens is, when the expression id("a".lower) == id("b.lower") is
evaluated, each of the bound method objects created with subexpressions
"a".lower" and "b".lower is referenced and thrown away as soon as "id"
is called (i.e. pretty much immediately), so the two never exist at the
same time. By the time "b".lower needs to be created, "a".lower is
freshly deceased, and the memory it used to occupy is ready for use, and
waiting at the top of the freelist.
If CPython happened to use a different allocation/garbage collection
strategy and failed to reuse the same memory address immediately, your
code would just (happen to) work.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
