On May 15, 4:57 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:45:16 pm CTO wrote:
On May 15, 4:14 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote: [snip]
Without an implementation, how can you possibly predict the cost of it?
You're right. Please provide code.
I think that should be up to some person who actually wants delayed evaluation of default arguments. As I've said repeatedly in the past, I'm a very strong -1 on removing the current behaviour, and +0 on allowing delayed evaluation of defaults as an optional feature. But since so many people want it, if the Python-Dev team decide to add it to the language I will need to live with whatever syntax is chosen.
-- Steven D'Aprano
Hmm. Well, that doesn't sound like a productive way forward to me, but as I say I'm neither the most intelligent nor the most experienced programmer here, so maybe it's the right way to go. I guess in that case, my current stance is -1 on this, both in added syntax and decorator form, with the caveat that I'd be happy to change my vote if anybody can produce code that does this without mangling performance or introspection.