On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 09:11:19 +1000, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 19:19:05 +, Bengt Richter wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:47:07 +1000, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:59:20 -0400, François Pinard wrote:
>>>
>>>
On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 19:19:05 +, Bengt Richter wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:47:07 +1000, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:59:20 -0400, François Pinard wrote:
>>
>>> [Peter Hansen]
Mike Meyer wrote:
> Yes. I once grabbed an old program that did
On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:47:07 +1000, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:59:20 -0400, François Pinard wrote:
>
>> [Peter Hansen]
>>> Mike Meyer wrote:
>>> > Yes. I once grabbed an old program that did assignments to None. But
>>> > that's always been a bad idea.
>>
>
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:59:20 -0400, François Pinard wrote:
> [Peter Hansen]
>> Mike Meyer wrote:
>> > Yes. I once grabbed an old program that did assignments to None. But
>> > that's always been a bad idea.
>
>> What was the use case!?
>
> People used to assign None to itself as a keyword argume
[Peter Hansen]
> Mike Meyer wrote:
> > Yes. I once grabbed an old program that did assignments to None. But
> > that's always been a bad idea.
> What was the use case!?
People used to assign None to itself as a keyword argument in function
headers. The goal was to make a local copy of the refere
Mike Meyer wrote:
> Yes. I once grabbed an old program that did assignments to None. But
> that's always been a bad idea.
What was the use case!?
-Peter
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
