Re: [Python-Dev] Pie-thon benchmark code ready
At 20:44 31.12.2003 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
But I've seen enough people write code that parses <...> reprs in some way to make me think that maybe they should be standardized somewhat, at least to the point where different Python implementations should not differ gratuitously. E.g. Jython could be much closer to CPython by inserting 'at 0x'. It's not like standardizing this would close off an important implementation freedom for other Python implementation. (I won't go as far as requiring that the number should be the same as hex(id(x)). :-)
I still think that depending on <...> reprs should be non-portable and discouraged, also CPython is already rather whimsical in its own evolution (Python 2.3):
class X: pass ... X <class __main__.X at 0x007E2C30> class X(object): pass ... X <class '__main__.X'>
I may change my opinion if someone writes a (unit) test pinning down what is exactly meant by that somewhat. regards.
I still think that depending on <...> reprs should be non-portable and discouraged, also CPython is already rather whimsical in its own evolution (Python 2.3):
class X: pass ... X <class __main__.X at 0x007E2C30> class X(object): pass ... X <class '__main__.X'>
I may change my opinion if someone writes a (unit) test pinning down what is exactly meant by that somewhat.
That's a good point. I'll add a SF entry to request these unit tests. What you see as whimsical was actually done for compatibility reasons; the new-style classes look more like built-in classes, whose repr is <type 'int'> or perhaps <type 'module.C'>. (It says 'type' if it's pure C, 'class' if it was created by a Python class statement.) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
participants (2)
-
Guido van Rossum -
Samuele Pedroni