Author arigo
Recipients alex, arigo, belopolsky, benjamin.peterson, brett.cannon, dmalcolm, jhylton, nnorwitz, orsenthil, pitrou, rhettinger, sdahlbac, thomaslee, titanstar
Date 2010-11-25.08:53:51
SpamBayes Score 2.28403e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1290675234.31.0.613131292494.issue10399@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
> But this seems to me like a contrived example: how often in real
> code do people pass around these builtins, rather than calling
> them directly?

From experience developing PyPy, every argument that goes "this theoretically breaks obscure code, but who writes it in that way?" is inherently broken: there *is* code out there that uses any and all Python strangenesses.  The only trade-offs you can make is in how much existing code you are going to break -- or make absolutely sure that you don't change semantics in any case.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-11-25 08:53:54arigosetrecipients: + arigo, jhylton, nnorwitz, brett.cannon, rhettinger, belopolsky, sdahlbac, orsenthil, titanstar, pitrou, thomaslee, benjamin.peterson, alex, dmalcolm
2010-11-25 08:53:54arigosetmessageid: <1290675234.31.0.613131292494.issue10399@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-11-25 08:53:51arigolinkissue10399 messages
2010-11-25 08:53:51arigocreate