variable declaration

[Alex Martelli]

Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at iinet.net.au> wrote:
   ...
> >     _temp = x.y
> >     x.y = type(temp).__irebind__(temp, z)
   ...
> I was thinking of something simpler:
> 
>    x.y
>    x.y = z
> 
> That is, before the assignment attempt, x.y has to resolve to *something*, but
> the interpreter isn't particularly fussy about what that something is.

OK, I guess this makes sense.  I just feel a tad apprehensive at
thinking that the semantics differ so drastically from that of every
other augmented assignment, I guess.  But probably it's preferable to
NOT let a type override what this one augmented assignment means; that
looks like an "attractive nuisance" tempting people to be too clever.

Still, if you write a PEP, I would mention the possible alternative and
why it's being rejected in favor of this simpler one.


Alex