Update of /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps
In directory usw-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv2201
Modified Files:
pep-0218.txt
Log Message:
BDFL ruling: Add section on open issues and leave it at that
Index: pep-0218.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps/pep-0218.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -C2 -d -r1.7 -r1.8
*** pep-0218.txt 13 Oct 2002 21:02:35 -0000 1.7
--- pep-0218.txt 15 Oct 2002 00:24:12 -0000 1.8
***************
*** 122,125 ****
--- 122,144 ----
+ Open Issues for the Long-Term Proposal
+
+ Earlier drafts of PEP 218 had only a single set type, but the
+ sets.py implementation in Python 2.3 has two, Set and
+ ImmutableSet. The long-term proposal has a single built-in
+ conversion function, set(iterable); how should instances of a
+ built-in immutable set type be created? Possibilities include a
+ second immutable_set() built-in, or perhaps the set() function
+ could take an additional argument,
+ e.g. set(iterable, immutable=True)?
+
+ The PEP proposes {1,2,3} as the set notation and {-} for the empty
+ set. Would there be different syntax for an immutable and a
+ mutable set? Perhaps the built-in syntax would only be for
+ mutable sets, and an immutable set would be created from a mutable
+ set using the appropriate built-in function,
+ e.g. immutable_set({1,2,3}).
+
+
Short-Term Proposal
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4