using "private" parameters as static storage?

[George Sakkis]

On Nov 13, 9:22 pm, Joe Strout <j... at strout.net> wrote:

> Steve wrote:
> > This is a pretty bizarre requirement, IMHO. The normal place to keep
> > such information is either class variables or instance variables.
>
> Holy cow, I thought it was just Chris, but there were half a dozen  
> similar responses after that.
>
> I'm starting to see a pattern here... any time Python lacks a feature,  
> the Python community's party line is "You don't need that feature!"
>
> I understand embracing the language rather than fighting against it,  
> but that can be taken too far -- if somebody expresses a need, and is  
> earnestly asking for input on a real programming problem, I'd think  
> the nice thing would be to explore the programming problem with them,  
> rather than arguing with them that they don't need what they claim  
> they need.

The burden of proof is on you to show that none of the several ways to
solve your problem in Python is good enough. So far your argument is
"I really miss that I can't do it exactly like in my pet-language".

> Hypothetically speaking, is it possible that there could be any  
> language feature Python doesn't have, which might be useful to anyone  
> in any situation?

Sure; true multithreading, macros, non-crippled lambda, optional
static typing are some reasonable features people miss in Python. The
topic of this thread just isn't one of them.

George