On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
>...
> So i think the clearest thing to do is to make sets a separate
> built-in type. Here's the interface i was thinking of:
I might agree with this, but would not recommend special syntax for it. In
particular:
> >>> s = {1, 5, 7} # no colons means a set
Without a lot of hackery or post-parse validation (e.g. at byte-compile
time), the above syntax is not possible.
I think the follow is just as readable, if not more so:
>>> s = set(1, 5, 7)
Where set() is a new builtin, taking an arbitrary number of arguments and
returning a new Set type.
The rest can easily follow once you have a Set object in hand.
Cheers,
-g
--
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
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