Message302505
| Author |
ncoghlan |
| Recipients |
Mark.Shannon, arigo, belopolsky, benjamin.peterson, ncoghlan, njs, vstinner, xdegaye, xgdomingo, yselivanov |
| Date |
2017年09月19日.06:06:28 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1505801188.94.0.178916423412.issue30744@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
For write-backs: no, since the interpreter will still write those values back into the destination cell
For locals display: no, since nothing changes for the handling of fast locals
For closure display: yes as, by default, debuggers will now print the closure cell, not the value the cell references - they'd need to be updated to display obj.cell_contents for items listed in co_freevars and co_cellvars.
That's why PEP 588 needs to be a PEP - there's a language design question around the trade-off between requiring all future Python implementations to implement a new write-through proxy type solely for this use case, or instead requiring trace functions to cope with co_freevars and co_cellvars being passed through as cell objects, rather than as direct references to their values. |
|