On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 07:02:42PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
> [email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> > This seems another use case — maybe it would be helpful to be able to
> > freeze an instance after creation for multiple use-
On 2/19/2018 7:02 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
But how?
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
... maybe it would be helpful to be able to
freeze an instance after creation for multiple use-cases?
And there's the crux of th
But how?
Well, I hadn’t thought that far ;-)
But it would make frozen an instance level property, rather than a
class-level one — some instances would be frozen, some not.
Which would be kinda compatible with the idea of hashability being a
property of values, rather than type. Frozen-ness woul
But how?
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
[email protected]> wrote:
> If I have this right, on the discussion about frozen and hash, a use
> case was brought up for taking a few steps to create an instance (and
> thus wanting it not frozen) and then wanting it ha
If I have this right, on the discussion about frozen and hash, a use
case was brought up for taking a few steps to create an instance (and
thus wanting it not frozen) and then wanting it hashable.
Which pointed to the idea of a “ freeze this from now on” method.
This seems another use case — mayb
