The future of Python immutability

Adam Skutt askutt at
Sat Sep 5 23:09:57 CEST 2009

On Sep 5, 11:29 am, Terry Reedy <tjre... at> wrote:
> This is a pointless replacement for 'def b(x): return x+a'

And?  That has nothing to do with anything I was saying whatsoever.
Point is: any mutable shared state is bad, and making objects
immutable isn't enough to remove all shared state, or even reduce it
to be available only with TEH EBIL global variables.

> Python does not have lambda objects. It has lambda expressions that
> produce function objects identical except for .__name__ to the
> equivalent def statement output.
Sure sounds like python has lambda objects to me then... the fact
they're a special case of some more general construct is mostly
semantics, /especially/ in the context of the point I was actually
making, no?

More information about the Python-list mailing list