Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: Effects of caching frequently used objects, was Re: Explaining names vs variables in Python
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 00:22:33 +1100
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <mailman.3.1458912161.28225.python-list@python.org>
References: <a894d5ed-d906-4ff7-a537-32bf0187e062@googlegroups.com> <nb6aqh$dp5$1@ger.gmane.org> <DUB123-W22AD13A14B7564949220F683830@phx.gbl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
In-Reply-To: <DUB123-W22AD13A14B7564949220F683830@phx.gbl>
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:105688

On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 12:03 AM, Albert-Jan Roskam
<sjeik_appie@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> You should not bother with object identity for objects other than None.
>
>
> A little late to the party, but: how about Ellipsis? Shouldn't "is" also be used for that one? (It's rare, I know :))

Yes, and also True and False, if you're checking for the specific
values. (Though it's more common in Python to merely care about
truthiness/falsiness.) Other common identity checks include:

if str is bytes:
    # Python 2 handling, where "native strings" are byte strings
else:
    # Python 3 handling, where "native strings" are text strings

if iter(x) is x:
    # x is an iterator, not some other iterable

_SENTINEL = object()
def func(arg=_SENTINEL):
    if arg is _SENTINEL:
        # arg was not passed

Anyone who says that identity checks are only for None is
significantly over-simplifying things. This isn't necessarily a bad
thing, but it should never be taken to be the whole story.

ChrisA