Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!cs.uu.nl!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.004
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'that?': 0.05; 'assignment': 0.07; '[1,': 0.09; 'classes.': 0.09; 'considered,': 0.09; 'immutable': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; '(0,': 0.16; '3],': 0.16; 'fails.': 0.16; 'fine.': 0.16; 'immutability': 0.16; 'immutable,': 0.16; 'mutable': 0.16; 'tup': 0.16; 'tuple': 0.16; 'workaround:': 0.16; 'all.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'basically': 0.19; 'solution.': 0.20; 'feb': 0.22; 'putting': 0.22; 'error': 0.23; 'propose': 0.24; 'earlier': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'specifically': 0.29; 'generally': 0.29; 'raise': 0.29; "doesn't": 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'fixing': 0.31; 'index,': 0.31; 'tuples': 0.31; 'types.': 0.31; "we're": 0.32; 'entirely': 0.33; 'fri,': 0.33; 'actual': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; "can't": 0.35; 'knows': 0.35; 'problem.': 0.35; 'objects': 0.35; 'one,': 0.35; 'usual': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'acceptable': 0.36; 'instances': 0.36; 'words,': 0.36; 'doing': 0.36; 'possible': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'changing': 0.37; 'list': 0.37; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'changed': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'simple': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'talking': 0.65; 'side': 0.67; 'containing': 0.69; 'preventing': 0.84; 'wanting': 0.93
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K+RwTpd7cdFJXa6l73zm+ZDwtrLf3lfwOM3zaF2ndQw=; b=bLT5fCqHDonKJ+lJDWmSI0JWEKxUAlS32tuC5+8G8baJskr7q+ERxSmmv46Q6Gxgtl yrUi4Anl7SZO79Fs6ph7Q6J/I1CoVtPV1sxnO/a50yT5bW7L5ha4EOpdnkMgM1iSY1Qp A8sje+ojX7plvM+XG404mZbtfdki/W68v99mj02xtJ6mZDJHqp9bOQEwRIloKWsl3Lcc 9chCCZbs5uJPqj0ppL0a2sY7jXqRQ7wF9fHNGQWAPdJLpQNdmrLYGCfxTc3KYj2NMli6 wfOKmCqDWmDRsq4ALgcWfDAOzO3N5qoFrlPTnmclI6lc4glG9X37zNGFZkk4vSLMn5OF +lww==
X-Received: by 10.68.129.201 with SMTP id ny9mr7966799pbb.70.1393651019210; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 21:16:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <059a3d10-453a-40fd-99f9-33ceb8ecabf7@googlegroups.com>
References: <lennh4$kpm$1@cabale.usenet-fr.net> <059a3d10-453a-40fd-99f9-33ceb8ecabf7@googlegroups.com>
From: Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 22:16:18 -0700
Subject: Re: Tuples and immutability
To: Python <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.7499.1393651028.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 32
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1393651028 news.xs4all.nl 2886 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:47231
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:67291

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Mark H. Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wro=
te:
> I really think this is a bug; honestly.  IMHO it should be an error to us=
e  +=3D  with an immutable type and that means not at all.  In other words,=
  the list should not even be considered, because we're talking about chang=
ing a tuple... which should not be changed (nor should its members be chang=
ed).

How would you propose doing that?  Bear in mind that while Python
knows that tuples specifically are immutable, it doesn't generally
know whether a type is immutable.  The best it can do is try the
operation and raise a TypeError if it fails.  So you can special-case
the code for +=3D to fail earlier if the left side of the assignment is
an tuple index, but it's not currently possible to do the same for
arbitrary immutable user types.

Even if that is solved, how you do propose preventing the simple workaround=
:
    tup =3D (0, [1, 2, 3], 4)
    thelist =3D tup[1]
    thelist +=3D [5, 6]
which currently works just fine.

I don't think that entirely disallowing mutable objects inside tuples
is an acceptable solution.  For one, it would mean never allowing
instances of custom classes.  They could then basically only contain
strings, numbers, frozensets, and other tuples.  For another, my
experience suggests that if I'm putting a list inside a tuple in the
first place, I am generally not relying on the immutability of that
tuple anyway, so I don't really see this as fixing an actual problem.
The usual reason for wanting an immutable object is to hash it, and a
tuple containing a list already can't be hashed.