[Guido]
> But the satisfaction that spelling "has_key" as "in" gives me suggests
> that there's more potential to it.
[Greg Ewing]
> I thought you'd always argued against this before, on
> the grounds that the convenience wasn't worth the
> inconsistency. Are you starting to change your mind?
This one's a done deal; it was released in 2.2:
>>> 2 in {2: 3}
1
>>>
Similarly, "for k in dict" is like "for k in dict.iterkeys()" in 2.2. Guido
never changes his mind <wink>.
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