Why no warnings when re-assigning builtin names?

[Seebs]

On 2011-08-17, Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Seebs <usenet-nospam at seebs.net> wrote:
>> Yes, but is it a *significant* cost? ?My assumption is that the suppression
>> would be of checking, not just of displaying messages.

> It mightn't be very significant, but there'd still be some cost.
> However, IMHO the greatest cost is the spamminess; forcing the user to
> deal with lines and lines of warnings is not a useful way to design a
> language.

Lines and lines?

I'd say if it's to be allowed to shadow built-ins (and I'm not sure that's
a good thing at all), you'd still be looking at one warning per shadowing,
which shouldn't be too many.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam at seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.