Python 3.0 - is this true?
aahz at pythoncraft.com
Mon Nov 10 15:40:05 CET 2008
In article <roy-6D96B6.19261609112008 at news.panix.com>,
Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> wrote:
>The point is that you're forced to use lists to compute the sub-sequences.
>This makes sense, because lists fit the "indefinite length sequence" idea.
>Then, you're forced to use tuples as the dictionary keys, because tuples
>are immutable/hashable, while lists are not. This use of tuples doesn't
>fit the "inherently fixed-sized collection of heterogeneous objects" idea
>of a tuple. In this case, a tuple really is just an immutable list. Your
>choice of containers is not based on any theoretical arguments of what each
>type was intended to represent, but the cold hard reality of what
>operations they support.
Note that one can, of course, write Python classes that do exactly what
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"It is easier to optimize correct code than to correct optimized code."
More information about the Python-list