Author abarry
Recipients David MacIver, Kevin Shweh, Tijs Van Oevelen, abarry, arigo, donmez, ezio.melotti, fijall, ncoghlan, r.david.murray, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, torsten
Date 2015-12-13.16:53:25
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1450025607.69.0.0680406694081.issue25843@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Nobody seems to have asked this, so I'll be that guy. In which circumstances does comparing two code objects (at function creation time, what's more) make any sense? I mean, I'm fine with being able to compare two code objects, but I don't think that's something that should be automated.

Is there any particular reason why this is so? The only reason I could think of was that small, identical functions could use the same code object -- but then Raymond proved that different files will not share the code object, and identical functions on different lines will not, either.

As functions grow in size and complexity, having two virtually identical functions is probably bad design to begin with. So, seeing as this causes more harm than good (and I doubt it's of any use nowadays - it might have been back then, I don't know), I suggest we simply drop the implcit code objects compare-and-replace that's happening here.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-12-13 16:53:27abarrysetrecipients: + abarry, arigo, rhettinger, ncoghlan, donmez, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray, torsten, fijall, serhiy.storchaka, David MacIver, Kevin Shweh, Tijs Van Oevelen
2015-12-13 16:53:27abarrysetmessageid: <1450025607.69.0.0680406694081.issue25843@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-12-13 16:53:27abarrylinkissue25843 messages
2015-12-13 16:53:25abarrycreate