Personally, if I had a time machine I would pick a syntax like set{...} over set([...]) but I don't have a time machine and even if I did I don't think I'd use it for that. The difference is that the former is special syntax, while the latter isn't. No matter what I do to the the varible r, r"string" is still a string, while set([...]) can be perverted.
However, given what we've got I can't really say that ([ instead of { is that big a deal.
--- Bruce
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.auben%2Bpython@benfinney.id.au
wrote:
Guido van Rossum guido@python.org writes:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Terry Reedytjreedy@udel.edu wrote:
OrderedDict({'a':1', 'b':'2', 'c':'3'}]
How about ['a':'1', 'b':'2', 'c':'3']?
-100.
(Hey! I though the valid range of votes was -1 through +1, I didn't know we were giving the BDFL more than one vote! :-)
Can you summarise what you dislike about the above syntax suggestion for ordered dict literal?
-- \ “If the desire to kill and the opportunity to kill came always | `\ together, who would escape hanging?” —Mark Twain, _Following | _o__) the Equator_ | Ben Finney
Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas