Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ebb08b6$0$29970$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
References: <Xns9F9684761E3AOKB@88.198.244.100> <436fb6a3-1075-45a6-8f93-5612d050b11a@q35g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmqESQc2HrMNSKLbnG5C8fvrOQvaPme0vTN9VS9eQkndFg@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.2558.1320799508.27778.python-list@python.org> <4eb9e9c2$0$29988$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.2577.1320879720.27778.python-list@python.org> <4ebb08b6$0$29970$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
From: Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 20:26:56 -0500
Subject: Re: all() is slow?
To: "Steven D'Aprano" <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: python-list@python.org
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.2580.1320888461.27778.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 64
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:15520

> Neither am I. I am less suspicious based on a reputation. Raymond is a
> well-known, trusted senior Python developer who knows what he is doing.

I don't really know anything about him or why people respect him, so I
have no reason to share your faith.

> It reads fine, and the justification is perfectly valid.

Well. It reads fine in a certain sense, in that I can figure out
what's going on (although I have some troubles figuring out why the
heck certain things are in the code). The issue is that what's going
on is otherworldly: this is not a Python pattern, this is not a normal
approach. To me, that means it does not read fine.

The use of exec also results in (seemingly) arbitrary constraints on
the input. Like, why can't "--" be a name? Because exec? Is there some
other reason?

I don't like the use of exec, and I don't like the justification (it
seems handwavy). I pointed this out in a thread full of people saying
"never EVER use exec this way", so it's obviously not just me that
thinks this is awful.

> You're right to be cautious of exec. You're wrong to be phobic about it.
> What do you think is going to happen?

I think somebody will read it and think this is a good idea.

Devin


On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:01:16 -0500, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
>
>>> If it were someone other than Raymond Hettinger responsible for the use
>>> of exec in namedtuple, I'd be a lot more suspicious of it.
>>
>> I'm not going to be less suspicious based on a name.
>
> Neither am I. I am less suspicious based on a reputation. Raymond is a
> well-known, trusted senior Python developer who knows what he is doing.
>
>
>> It reads like
>> insanity, and the justification was terrible.
>
> It reads fine, and the justification is perfectly valid.
>
> You're right to be cautious of exec. You're wrong to be phobic about it.
> What do you think is going to happen? The exec call inside namedtuple is
> going to creep out of the module in the wee hours of the night,
> contaminating other functions and modules while you sleep? Be serious. If
> you have an actual concrete security vulnerability caused by the use of
> exec inside namedtuple, or some other bug, then say so. Otherwise, your
> paranoia is unjustified.
>
>
>
> --
> Steven
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>