[Python-3000] Set literal
mike.klaas at gmail.com
Wed Jan 30 01:18:39 CET 2008
On 29-Jan-08, at 2:29 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Jim Jewett wrote:
>> The majority of uses need a mutable set that starts empty.
> Does anyone have evidence to support that assertion?
> Thinking about my own code, I probably do membership
> tests on constant sets (represented as tuples) about as
> often as I build up mutable sets (or some equivalent data
over 120k loc:
All uses of set():
$ pygrep '[^.a-z]set[(]' | grep -v unittest | wc
320 1583 24774
$ pygrep '[^.a-z]set[(][)]' | grep -v unittest | wc
114 478 7406
Some of the uses in the first group could be replaced with frozenset,
of course. Looking at the examples, though, I would say that most of
the uses of sets start out using a set constructed using
comprehension or set(<iterable>).
I think that 'set()' is a perfectly fine and readable empty set
More information about the Python-3000