On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:47 PM Inada Naoki <songofaca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So reusing | to set union is very natural to me. > I understand that, and agree -- it made sense to me when set() was introduced. But that wasn't my point -- we are not deciding now what operator to use for set union, we are deciding what operator to use for dict merging. And I don't think that (most) people will naturally think about set union when they want to put two dicts together. logic theory aside, most people both learn dicts first, and use them a lot more than sets. And I don't think it's about uptake either -- I think it will be a long-standing difference. That being said, this is just a new way to spell what can already be done, so not a big deal either way. > But if we use + for dict merging, I think we should add + to set too. > Then the set has `.union()`, `|` and `+` for the same behavior. > I'd be fine with that :-) -- I suspect that if operators on dicts and sets were considered at the same time, + may well have been chosen. And if dicts supported + when sets were introduced, it probably would have been used there. I'm going to try to avoid any more comments on this -- it's all been said, many, many times -- I think it's time for a decision, and we can all go bike-shed other things :-) -CHB -- Christopher Barker, PhD Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________ 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/VFSJE4JFEQVJOYLK2EHFUJ45ATMTJIZK/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
