On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> > now that we have the sq_contains slot, would it make
> > sense to add support for "key in dict" ?
> >
> > after all,
> >
> > if key in dict:
> > ...
>
> The counter has always been, "but couldn't that be read as 'if value in
> dict' ??"
I've been quite happy with "if key in dict". I forget if i already
made this analogy when it came up in regard to the issue of supporting
a "set" type, but if you think of it like a real dictionary -- when
someone asks you if a particular word is "in the dictionary", you look
it up in the keys of the dictionary, not in the definitions.
And it does read much better than has_key, and makes it easier to use
dicts like sets.
So i think it would be nice, though i've seen this meet opposition before.
-- ?!ng
"You should either succeed gloriously or fail miserably. Just getting
by is the worst thing you can do."
-- Larry Smith
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