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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #59165 > unrolled thread

Re: 'isimmutable' and 'ImmutableNester'

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: 'isimmutable' and 'ImmutableNester' Frank-Rene Schäfer <fschaef@gmail.com> - 2013-11-12 10:12 +0100

#59165 — Re: 'isimmutable' and 'ImmutableNester'

(1) hash()-ability != immutability (!)

Proof:

class X:
    def __hash__(self): return 0

def pseudo_isimmutable(this):
    try:
        hash(this)
        return True
    except TypeError:
        return False

shapeshifter = (1, 2, X())
print pseudo_isimmutable(shapeshifter)
shapeshifter[2].changed = 4711


(2) The intended scenario is not described by a fragment such as:

      if isimmutable(obj): x = obj
      else:                     x = copy.copy(obj)
      function_that_might_modify(x)

But instead, a more characteristic scenario is

     assert isimmutable(obj)
     # What happens behind the curtain may rely on referencing
     things_behind_the_curtain(obj)

Or,

    def let_me_know():
         obj = get_what_is_wanted()
         assert isimmutable(obj)
         # The caller may do with it what he wants without risking consistency
         return obj

where lots of copying





2013/11/11  <random832@fastmail.us>:
>> A built-in function 'isimmutable()' shall tell efficiently whether the
>> object
>> of concern is mutable or not.
>
> What's the benefit over attempting to hash() the object?
>
> copy.deepcopy already has special case for int, string, and tuples
> (including tuples that do and do not have mutable members) - could what
> you need be accomplished by overriding __copy__ and __deepcopy__ in your
> custom class to return itself if it is immutable?

2013/11/11  <random832@fastmail.us>:
>> A built-in function 'isimmutable()' shall tell efficiently whether the
>> object
>> of concern is mutable or not.
>
> What's the benefit over attempting to hash() the object?
>
> copy.deepcopy already has special case for int, string, and tuples
> (including tuples that do and do not have mutable members) - could what
> you need be accomplished by overriding __copy__ and __deepcopy__ in your
> custom class to return itself if it is immutable?

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web