On 28 Jan 2008, at 23:45, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
...
>> Have a look at PEP 218.
>
> That PEP proposes that there be no set literal or comprehension
> syntax, and doesn't contain any discussion on whether such
> syntax should produce sets or frozensets if it were to exist.
I
On 1/29/08, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 29-Jan-08, at 2:29 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> > Jim Jewett wrote:
> >> The majority of uses need a mutable set that starts empty.
> > Does anyone have evidence to support that assertion?
> $ pygrep '[^.a-z]set[(]' | grep -v unittest | wc
>
On 29-Jan-08, at 2:29 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Jim Jewett wrote:
>
>> The majority of uses need a mutable set that starts empty.
>
> Does anyone have evidence to support that assertion?
>
> Thinking about my own code, I probably do membership
> tests on constant sets (represented as tuples) about
Jim Jewett wrote:
> The majority of uses need a mutable set that starts empty.
Does anyone have evidence to support that assertion?
Thinking about my own code, I probably do membership
tests on constant sets (represented as tuples) about as
often as I build up mutable sets (or some equivalent da
On 1/28/08, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please don't reopen this. There are good reasons for 'set' to be the
> default set type and 'frozenset' to appear like a poor cousin. For
> one, their naming. This was all reasoned out long, long ago, in Python
> 2.3 with the sets module.
I
