On 11/8/10 5:24 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message<mailman.608.1288889032.2218.python-l...@python.org>, Robert Kern
wrote:
On 11/4/10 2:07 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message<mailman.504.1288718704.2218.python-l...@python.org>, Robert
Kern wrote:
On 11/2/10 2:12 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message<mailman.475.1288670833.2218.python-l...@python.org>, Robert
Kern wrote:
"Immutable objects" are just those without an obvious API for
modifying them.
They are ones with NO legal language constructs for modifying them.
Hint: if a selector of some part of such an object were to occur on the
LHS of an assignment, and that would raise an error, then the object is
immutable. The interpreter already knows all this.
Incorrect. RHS method calls can often modify objects.
So bloody what?
So examining LHS "selectors" is not sufficient for determining
immutability.
Yes it is. All your attempts at counterexamples showed is that it is not
necessary, not that it is not sufficient.
file objects. hashlib hash objects. weakref.ref objects.
Again, I ask you to point out a piece of code in the interpreter that makes this
determination. You have repeatedly claimed that they exist, but you have not
produced a single example.
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
