Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #66251

Re: singleton ... again

Show key headers only | View raw

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
> We don't use `is None` instead of `== None` for the speed. We use it for
> robustness. We don't want arbitrary __eq__()s to interfere with our sentinel
> tests. If None weren't a singleton that we could use as such a sentinel,
> we'd make one.

Sure. Yes, its identity is important as part of its being the Python
equivalent of C's null pointer. But the main point of singletons is to
be able to be "instantiated" without creating new elements; the
sentinel status of None is no different from the classic way of
recognizing the presence of an argument:

_SENTINEL = object()
def foo(arg1, arg2=_SENTINEL):
    if arg2 is not _SENTINEL: do_stuff_with(arg2)

That's not a singleton in that sense; it's just a unique object. You
could use [] for that instead of object() and it would work just the
same. So None is serving multiple purposes: it's an empty object, but
it's also a sentinel. In many uses, it wouldn't be a problem to have
more Nones floating around, hence it's mostly like your classic
singleton.

My main point about mutable vs immutable is more clearly seen with
integers and strings. Some integers are cached; some strings are
interned; nobody particularly cares about the exact boundaries, except
when playing around with id() or introspection of some sort.

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-11 20:34 -0800
  Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-11 21:15 -0800
  Re:singleton ... again Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-02-12 00:48 -0500
    Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-12 00:55 -0500
      Re: singleton ... again Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-02-12 23:04 +1300
        Re: singleton ... again Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-02-12 21:09 +1100
          Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-12 08:40 -0500
          Re: singleton ... again Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org> - 2014-02-13 10:00 +0100
            Re: singleton ... again Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-02-13 06:50 -0500
            Re: singleton ... again Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-13 22:57 +1100
              Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-13 10:24 -0500
                Re: singleton ... again Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-14 07:03 +1100
                Re: singleton ... again Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2014-02-13 21:13 +0000
                Re: singleton ... again Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-14 08:27 +1100
            Re: singleton ... again Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-02-13 08:57 -0800
              Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-13 12:57 -0500
                Re: singleton ... again Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-02-13 10:31 -0800
                Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-13 14:03 -0500
                Re: singleton ... again Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-14 06:50 +1100
                Re: singleton ... again Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-02-13 22:28 +0000
              Re: singleton ... again Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-02-14 18:21 +1300
            Re: singleton ... again Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-02-14 06:16 +1100
        Re: singleton ... again Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-02-13 02:58 +0000
          Re: singleton ... again Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-02-13 14:07 +1100
            Re: singleton ... again Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-02-13 04:24 +0000
              Re: singleton ... again Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-02-13 15:33 +1100
              Re: singleton ... again Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-02-14 18:15 +1300
          Re: singleton ... again Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-02-14 18:06 +1300
    Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 09:50 -0800
      Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 09:56 -0800
        Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 09:58 -0800
        Re: singleton ... again Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-02-13 10:57 +1300
          Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 17:38 -0800
      Re: singleton ... again Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-02-12 18:57 +0000
        Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 17:02 -0800
      Re: singleton ... again Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-02-12 16:34 -0500
        Re: singleton ... again Asaf Las <roegltd@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 17:34 -0800
      Re: singleton ... again Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-02-13 10:08 +1100
      Re: singleton ... again Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-02-12 20:57 -0500
  Re: singleton ... again Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-02-12 15:05 -0700

csiph-web