On Sat, Aug 17, 2002, François Pinard wrote: > [Guido van Rossum] >> >> - The set constructors have an optional second argument, sort_repr, >> defaulting to False, which decides whether the elements are sorted >> when str() or repr() is taken. I'm not sure if there would be >> negative consequences of removing this argument and always sorting >> the string representation. > > Unless there is something deep attached to the properties of the sets > themselves, I do not understand why the sorting/non-sorting virtues of > `repr' should be tied with the constructor. > > There is a precedent with dicts. They print non-sorted, but they > pretty-print (through the `pprint' module) sorted. Maybe the same could > be done for sets: use `pprint' if you want a sorted representation. > But otherwise, sets as well as dicts should print using the same order > by which elements are to be iterated upon or listed, in various other > circumstances. +1 -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ Project Vote Smart: http://www.vote-smart.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