On Nov 13, 2015 8:03 PM, "Chris Angelico" <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:42 am, Chris Angelico wrote: > > > >> However, this is a reasonable call for the abolition of unary plus... > > > > The only way you'll take unary plus out of Python is by prying it from my > > cold, dead hands. > > > > > > BTW, unary minus suffers from the same "problem": > > > > x =- y # oops, meant x -= y > > > > If anything, this is an argument against the augmented assignment > > short-cuts, rather than the operators. > > Yes, unary minus has the same issue - but it's a lot more important > than unary plus is. In ECMAScript, unary plus means "force this to be > a number"; what's its purpose in Python?
It forces a Counter to contain only positive counts? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
