Wrong.
If you're not willing to make substantive contributions to this thread, I
suggest you refrain from posting further.
------- Original Message -------
On Friday, March 11th, 2022 at 4:42 PM, David Mertz, Ph.D.
<david.me...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So it appears the "problem" this is intended to solve is "Python isn't
> Haskell."
>
> But Haskell exists, and this is a non-problem looking for a solution.
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:39 PM wfdc <w...@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Don't yell.
>>
>> You just effectively re-implemented Christopher Barker's solution (which was
>> also present in the StackOverflow thread), with the downside that it fails
>> the immutability criterion.
>>
>> Saying "just be careful not to mutate the original datastructure" isn't a
>> solution. There's a reason we have immutable types: To enforce​
>> immutability. Otherwise, why aren't you proposing getting rid of the tuple
>> type entirely?
>>
>> ------- Original Message -------
>> On Friday, March 11th, 2022 at 4:29 PM, David Mertz, Ph.D.
>> <david.me...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:16 PM wfdc via Python-ideas
>>> <python-ideas@python.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> why haven't you used a list
>>>> 2. I don't want to modify the original sequence.
>>>
>>> There's a really easy solution for you that will even be more perfomant.
>>>
>>> Use a list and DON'T modify the original!
>>>
>>> This is ABSOLUTELY an XY-problem.... which fact was difficult to wrestle
>>> out of you.
>>>
>>>>>> stuff1 = [a, b, c, d]
>>>>>> stuff2 = stuff1[:]
>>>>>> stuff2[2] = e
_______________________________________________
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/DUJND4AXSODQAKRMA7NYRYREBXBAZ635/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
