Paul Rubin wrote: > Jeff Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I think you're a little confused about the meaning of "numeric >> literal." (5+1) is not a numeric literal. Neither is >> (999999999999999999999999999999+1). >> >> The flyweight pattern does not guarantee that all equivalent instances >> of an object type will be identical. > > I don't think there's any Python language rule that says multiple uses > of the same numeric literal turn into the same object. It's just an > optimization (constant folding) that the CPython implementation > happens to perform. Other implementations might not do it, or CPython > might do it differently in some future version.
Thanks for clarifying. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
