On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:04:09 -0700, zaur wrote: > On 1 сен, 03:31, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this- cybersource.com.au> > wrote: >> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:21:22 -0700, zaur wrote: >> > As a result of this debate is not whether we should conclude that >> > there should be two types of integers in python: 1) immutable >> > numbers, which behave as constant value; 2) mutable numbers, which >> > behave as variable value? >> >> What can you do with mutable numbers that you can't do with immutable >> ones, and why do you want to do it? >> >> -- >> Steven > > Mutable numbers acts as variable quantity.
So do immutable numbers bound to a name. > So when augmented assignment > is used there is no need to create a new number object in every binary > operation. "No need", sure, but there's no *need* to use object oriented code in the first place, or garbage collectors, or high level languages, or even functions. People got by with GOTO and assembly for years :) We use all these things because they make *programming* easier, even if it adds runtime overhead. I'm asking what *problem* you are trying to solve with mutable numbers, where immutable numbers are not satisfactory. The only answer I can imagine is that you're worried about the overhead of creating new integer objects instead of just flipping a few bits in an existing integer variable. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
