Joel Davis wrote:
On Dec 29, 11:21 am, Emile van Sebille <em...@fenx.com> wrote:
On 12/29/2009 7:02 AM Joel Davis said...
On Dec 29, 2:29 am, "Gabriel Genellina"<gagsl-...@yahoo.com.ar>
wrote:
I'm sure other limitations apply too -- don't rely on this technique for
anything critical.
--
Gabriel Genellina
Gabriel,
thanks for your input, I had no idea that did that and it could have
been deployed without even being aware of it, caused consternation and
headaches galore.
In an extremely controlled situation you may avoid headaches when
deploying this kind of technique. Regardless, we all want to make you
aware that this _will_ likely cause headaches, and, idle curiosity
aside, none of us can imagine the problem to which this is the
appropriate solution.
It's fun to work out, but you're probably better served if you describe
the problem you're solving and consider the alternatives suggested.
Dependence on introspection belongs in programming tools, not in
applications deployed across versions and platforms.
Emile
Emile, essentially, the situation is that I'm trying to create an API
for consumption scripting. As it stands now, in initial development
they can pass callback function. The idea was to enable them to pass
variables and have the handling function determine the type and just
drop the value into it instead of calling function with the value as
an argument. The problem with that approach is determining exactly
which variable was passed. My idea was to use this to capture the name
and then modify the globals for the executing frame so that the passed
variable represents the new value.
All I can say is: Yuck! Don't do that! :-)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
