thanks everybody.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:35:31 -0700 (PDT), akva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> well, frankly I expected a |= b to mean exactly the same as a = a | b
> regardless of the object type.
So did I. I'm glad your post called this to my attention; I
recently told my kid exactly that wrong thing.
--
To
akva wrote:
could you please refer me a link where this is specified? I couldn't
find it in python documentation
http://docs.python.org/ref/augassign.html
"An augmented assignment expression like x += 1 can be rewritten as x =
x + 1 to achieve a similar, but not exactly equal effect. In the
thanks all,
>Yes. That's the exact purpose of the in-place operators when they deal with
>mutable objects. What else did you expect?
well, frankly I expected a |= b to mean exactly the same as a = a | b
regardless of the object type.
> The manual explicitly specifies that mutable objects may imp
akva wrote:
Hi All,
what's the exact semantics of the |= operator in python?
It seems that a |= d is not always equivalent to a = a | d
The manual explicitly specifies that mutable objects may implement the
operation part of operation-assignments by updating in place -- so that
akva wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> what's the exact semantics of the |= operator in python?
> It seems that a |= d is not always equivalent to a = a | d
>
> For example let's consider the following code:
>
> def foo(s):
>s = s | set([10])
>
> def ba
Hi All,
what's the exact semantics of the |= operator in python?
It seems that a |= d is not always equivalent to a = a | d
For example let's consider the following code:
def foo(s):
s = s | set([10])
def bar(s):
s |= set([10])
s = set([1,2])
foo(s)
print s # prints set([1,
