Message 78086 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	ncoghlan
Recipients	amaury.forgeotdarc, eric.smith, gpolo, hagen, ncoghlan, rhettinger
Date	2008-12-20.06:51:26
SpamBayes Score	5.6186265e-05
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<1229755888.97.0.55180117831.issue4701@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
It has been pointed out to me that xrange() objects are hashable in 2.x, and since these range objects are immutable, I don't believe there is any driving reason for them not to be hashable. At that point the question becomes one of why xrange() is being initialised correctly in 2.x while something is going wrong with the tp_hash slot initialisation for range() in 3.x that doesn't get fixed until PyType_Ready is called to populate tp_dict.

It has been pointed out to me that xrange() objects are hashable in 2.x,
and since these range objects are immutable, I don't believe there is
any driving reason for them not to be hashable.

At that point the question becomes one of why xrange() is being
initialised correctly in 2.x while something is going wrong with the
tp_hash slot initialisation for range() in 3.x that doesn't get fixed
until PyType_Ready is called to populate tp_dict.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2008-12-20 06:51:29	ncoghlan	set	recipients: + ncoghlan, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, eric.smith, gpolo, hagen
2008-12-20 06:51:28	ncoghlan	set	messageid: <1229755888.97.0.55180117831.issue4701@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2008-12-20 06:51:27	ncoghlan	link	issue4701 messages
2008-12-20 06:51:26	ncoghlan	create