> I would expect %w{ ... } to return a set, not a list:
>
> %w[ ... ] # list
> %w{ ... ] # set
> %w( ... ) # tuple
>
> and I would describe them as list/set/tuple "word literals". Unlike
> list etc displays [spam, eggs, cheese] these would actually be true
> literals that can be determined entirely at compile-time.
A more convenient way to populate lists/tuples/sets full of strings at
compile time seems like a win.
If I might be allowed to bikeshed: the w seems unnecessary. Why not drop it
in favor of a single character like %, and use an optional r for raw
strings?
%[words] # "words".split()
%{words} # set("words".split())
%(words) # tuple("words".split())
%r[wo\rds] # "wo\\rds".split()
%r{wo\rds} # set("wo\\rds".split())
%r(wo\rds) # tuple("wo\\rds".split())
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/LZK45BJ5WGSOQ5PVLMV6YTWBW376RIJ4/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
