On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Brian Curtin <br...@python.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mark Adam <dreamingforw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> A colleague pointed me at Doug's excellent article here:
>>> ...which made me a little sad, I suspect I'm not the only one who finds:
>>>
>>> a_dict = dict(
>>> x = 1,
>>> y = 2,
>>> z = 3,
>>> ...
>>> )
>>>
>>> ...easier to read than:
>>>
>>> a_dict = {
>>> 'x':1,
>>> 'y':2,
>>> 'z':3,
>>> ...
>>> }
>>
>> Hey, it makes me a little sad that dict breaks convention by allowing
>> the use of unquoted characters (which everywhere else looks like
>> variable names) just for a silly typing optimization.
>
> What convention and typing optimization is this? I hope you aren't
> suggesting it should be dict("x"=1) or dict("x":1)?
Try the canonical {'x':1}. Only dict allows the special
initialization above. Other collections require an iterable. I'm guessing
**kwargs initialization was only used because it is so simple to
implement, but that's not necessarily a heuristic for good language design.
mark
_______________________________________________
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
