allowing braces around suites
roy at panix.com
Sat Aug 28 17:14:14 CEST 2004
In article <41309d32$0$65611$a1866201 at newsreader.visi.com>,
Grant Edwards <grante at visi.com> wrote:
> Because so many people at first think that parens construct
> tuples the way square-brackets and curly-brackets construct
> lists. When in reality it's commas that construct tuples, but
> only in certain contexts because commas are used for about
> three other purposes as well.
> IMO, the only non-ugly, non-hack solution would be to have
> another set of delimters that are used as tuple-constructors so
> that the syntax for a literal tuple, a literal list, and a
> literal dictionary are consistent.
I agree. It's even uglier that "," doesn't form a zero-length tuple.
Thus you get:
tuple0 = ()
tuple1 = 1,
So, is it parens that form tuples, or commas? I guess There's More Than
One Way To Do It :-)
My personal choice would have been angle brackets, i.e. <1, 2, 3>.
Then, <1> would have been a length-1 tuple with no ambiguity.
tuple0 = <>
tuple1 = <1>
tuple2 = <1, 2>
But it's way too late for that now. Maybe in P3K?
More information about the Python-list