←back to thread

191 points jwilk | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.194s | source
Show context
pansa2 ◴[] No.46230704[source]
I wonder whether Raymond Hettinger has an opinion on this PEP. A long time ago, he wrote: "freezing dicts is a can of worms and not especially useful".

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/0...

replies(8): >>46230899 #>>46230957 #>>46231064 #>>46231597 #>>46232170 #>>46234698 #>>46235104 #>>46271495 #
pkulak ◴[] No.46235104[source]
This is why I love how Rust approached this; almost by accident to make borrow checking work. Every reference is either mutable or not, and (with safe code), you can't use an immutable reference to get a mutable reference anywhere down the chain. So you can slowly construct a map through a mutable reference, but then return it out of a function as immutable, and that's the end of it. It's no longer ever mutable, and no key or value is either. There's no need to make a whole new object called FrozenHashMap, and then FrozenList, and FrozenSet, etc. You don't need a StringBuilder because String is mutable, unless you don't want it to be. It's all just part of the language.

Kotlin _kinda_ does this as well, but if you have a reference to an immutable map in Kotlin, you are still free to mutate the values (and even keys!) as much as you like.

replies(3): >>46235897 #>>46236777 #>>46237010 #
vlovich123 ◴[] No.46237010[source]
You cannot return an immutable version. You can return it owned (in which case you can assign/reassign it to a mut variable at any point) or you can take a mut reference and return an immutable reference - but whoever is the owner can almost always access it mutably.
replies(2): >>46237152 #>>46237628 #
1. pkulak ◴[] No.46237152[source]
Arg, you’re right. Not sure what I was thinking there. I still think my point stands, because you get the benefits of immutability, but yeah, I didn’t explain it well.