[Python-Dev] quick poll: could int, str, tuple etc. become type objects?

[Fredrik Lundh]

guido wrote:
> Now invoke the Zen of Python: "There should be one-- and preferably
> only one --obvious way to do it."  So why not make these built-in
> functions *be* the corresponding types?

+1 from here.

> - Do we really want to have built-in names for code objects, traceback
>   objects, and other figments of Python's internal workings?

nope.

> - What should the argument to dict() be?  A list of (key, value)
>   pairs, a list of alternating keys and values, or something else?

how about supporting the following:

    d == dict(d.items())
    d == dict(d.keys(), d.values())

and also:

    d = dict(k=v, k=v, ...)

Cheers /F