Sorry if I am asking the obvious, but why are the aliases of set types not
included in the 'types' module? I thought for a moment that they are just
classes, but no, they introduce themselves as built-in types, just like any
other standard Python type.
print type(set([1, 2, 4]))
type 'set'
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:04:35 +0200
haael ha...@interia.pl wrote:
Sorry if I am asking the obvious, but why are the aliases of set types not
included in the 'types' module?
Because there's no reason to include them, since they are already in
the root (builtins) namespace.
You'll notice that
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:04 AM, haael ha...@interia.pl wrote:
Sorry if I am asking the obvious, but why are the aliases of set types not
included in the 'types' module? I thought for a moment that they are just
classes, but no, they introduce themselves as built-in types, just like any
other
Because there's no reason to include them, since they are already in
the root (builtins) namespace.
You'll notice that in Python 3, the types module only contains types
which are not obviously accessed through easier means:
OK, makes sense, but in this case it would be handy to have some
2011/4/25 haael ha...@interia.pl:
Because there's no reason to include them, since they are already in
the root (builtins) namespace.
You'll notice that in Python 3, the types module only contains types
which are not obviously accessed through easier means:
OK, makes sense, but in this
On 02:01 pm, ha...@interia.pl wrote:
Because there's no reason to include them, since they are already in
the root (builtins) namespace.
You'll notice that in Python 3, the types module only contains types
which are not obviously accessed through easier means:
OK, makes sense, but in this
Because there's no reason to include them, since they are already in
the root (builtins) namespace.
You'll notice that in Python 3, the types module only contains types
which are not obviously accessed through easier means:
OK, makes sense, but in this case it would be handy to have some
