Paul Moore wrote:
> One downside, which I only point out because someone will, is that
> optimization opportunities will be lost for the usual reason - the
> optimizer can't be sure that set (or whatever) hasn't been reassigned.
> But I still see that as something to be addressed independently, if at
> all.
If we decide to go this route (supporting braced calls), I'd quite like to see
{} become a simple abbreviation for dict{}, similar to the way [] would be an
abbreviation of list{} and () would be an abbreviation of tuple{}.
While I felt the optimisation benefits of a set literal were worth mentioning,
they're significantly less important to me than the readability benefits.
Maybe {1, 2, 3} should actually result in the old pseudo-set of {1:None,
2:None, 3:None}. It eliminates the type ambiguity as bare braces would always
result in a dict, and getting a real set or frozenset is just a matter of
putting the relevant name before the first brace.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
