Sept. 14, 2008
3:52 p.m.
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 10:45:39PM +0200, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: -> > And replace it with what? -> -> I'm sure this will evolve into a long discussion on syntax, so -> I'll start: assert could become a function with one or two -> arguments. The arguments would always get evaluated; the actual -> exception-raising could still be conditional (perhaps through -> a context manager). Doesn't this change the behavior in optimized code, for assert statements with side effects? If we don't have specialized syntax -- that is, if 'assert' just becomes another built-in function -- then it can't be special-cased in the translation to byte-code, can it? --titus -- C. Titus Brown, ctb@msu.edu