I should not have emphasized the atomicity here, this was not intended to be the main reason. On Mar 15, 2012 2:11 AM, "Chris Rebert" email@example.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Masklinn firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 2012-03-14, at 18:36 , Matt Joiner wrote:
set.add(x) could return True if x was added to the set, and False if x was already in the set.
That does not mesh with the usual Python semantics of methods either having a side-effect (mutation) or returning a value. Why would that happen with sets but not with e.g. dicts?
The rule is a bit more complicated than that (e.g. consider list.pop()). It's gets fleshed out well in: http://bugs.python.org/issue12192
set.remove() arguably "returns" the same sort of indication as that which is proposed, in that it either raises or doesn't raise KeyError depending on whether the value was present.
But yeah, these boolean return values aren't of huge utility, particularly in the multithreaded case.