On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> removing it is a bad idea for the reasons already given, but requiring
> parentheses could help.
>
> that is, the following would result in a warning or an error:
>
> L = ["first", "second" "third"]
>
> but the following wouldn't:
>
> L = ["first", ("second" "third")]
>
> T = ("This is a line of text.\n"
> "This is another line of text.\n")
This would avoid accidentally leaving out commas in list construction, but
tuple construction would still have the same problem. And it's still a
change in the language which would probably affect lots of existing code.
I doubt if there is any problem-free way of trying to address this issue
by changing the language.
One suggestion to help minimize problems when writing code would be always
to put the optional trailing comma:
[
'a',
'b',
'c',
]
which is also a revision-control-friendly practice, and in the tuple
constuction context avoids the possibility of removing an item from a
two-tuple and ending up with not a one-tuple but instead just the item
itself.
Isaac Morland CSCF Web Guru
DC 2554C, x36650 WWW Software Specialist
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