On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 6:06 AM Matt del Valle
What I meant to say is that the other comparable builtin types (comma-delimited containers of some description) that have literals built into the language (list, tuple, dict) also have a literal that represents an empty version of themselves, except for set.
To emphasize that point, sets DO have a literal (or display, or whatever we want to call it) for non-empty sets, so there is a real asymmetry there. I like {,} alright, and then maybe allowing [,] and (,) for lists and tuple, but where does dict fit in? maybe: {:,} ? kinda ugluy, but provides more symmetry The fact that () creates a tuple, but (2) does not is problematic -- way too late to change anything there, but adding (,) as an optional empty tuple might help a tiny bit in the future. -CHB -- Christopher Barker, PhD (Chris) Python Language Consulting - Teaching - Scientific Software Development - Desktop GUI and Web Development - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython