On 2/1/06, Greg Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Generator expressions make syntactic support irrelevant: > > Not when you're teaching the language to undergraduates: I haven't > actually done the study yet (though I may this summer), but I'm willing to > bet that allowing "math" notation for sets will more than double their > use. (Imagine having to write "list(1, 2, 3, 4, 5)"...)
Actually, as far as I'm concerned, I'd just love to remove the [ ... ] notation for building lists if good ways could be found to distinguish "a list with this one item" from "a list with the same items as this iterable". list(1, 2, 3) is perfectly easy to explain, more readable, and just as likely to be used, if not more, than cryptic shorthand [1,2,3]. "If you want APL, you know where to find it" (==on IBM's online store, called APL2!-). > > Accordingly,Guido rejected the braced notation for set comprehensions. > > See: http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0218.html > > "...however, the issue could be revisited for Python 3000 (see PEP 3000)." > So I'm only 1994 years early ;-) Don't be such a pessimist, it's ONLY 994 years to go! Alex _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
