Chris Angelico rosuav at
Wed Jan 21 14:01:04 CET 2015

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Tim Chase
<python.list at> wrote:
> On 2015-01-21 23:35, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Rustom Mody wrote
>> > Its a bit of a nuisance that we have to write set([1,2,3]) for
>> > the first
>> Looks like {1,2,3} works for me.
> That hasn't always worked:

Sure, but "we have to write" implies current status; Python 2.7 was
released in 2010, so I would expect that anyone who's complaining
about set notation should have access to it. Even if it didn't work in
2.7 and you had to use 3.x, the argument's still fairly weak when it's
alongside a pipe-dream desire to use specific mathematical Unicode
characters in source code, because that's clearly a 3.x-only feature
(where source code is Unicode text rather than ASCII).

Nobody's going to moan "It's silly that we have to use 1 and 0 instead
of nice keywords True and False" on the basis that True and False
didn't exist in Python 2.0. At very least, use 2.7 before you
complain; preferably, use 3.4 (or 3.5).


More information about the Python-list mailing list