Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
[...]
> Just like set(sequence) is the set associated with that sequence, not
> the set part of that sequence, and float('3.14') is the float
> associated with '3.14', not the float part of '3.14', etc. Type names
> do not normally retrieve pieces of other objects.
>>> type(object)
<type 'type'>
>>> list({1:2, 3:4})
[1, 3]
>>> set({1:2, 3:4})
set([1, 3])
>>>
[...]
Surely the real issue here is that int() grew up purely as a conversion
function, and metamorphosed into a type when the classic classes were
moved into the background.
A brief scan of the 2.4 library (the nearest to hand) shows no uses of
int() without an argument in the top level modules. There's clearly no
point calling int() with a literal integer argument, so its uses for
conversion clearly dominate its use as a pure type constructor.
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
_______________________________________________
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
