[Tutor] If tuple cannot be sorted, then why sorted() on a tuple is fine?

[C W]

This is a follow up. I actually ran into this today:

import numpy as np
xArray = np.ones((3, 4))

> xArray.shape
(3, 4)
> np.shape(xArray)
(3, 4)

It was confusing to see that both xArray.shape and np.shape() worked. Are
they equivalent?

In the case of sort() vs sorted(), they are different, but close enough to
mistake them as the same thing.

Thanks!

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:32 PM, C W <tmrsg11 at gmail.com> wrote:

> As pointed out by someone else, ?sorted
> sorted(iterable, key=None, reverse=False)
>
> It seems like the only requirement is iterable. I guess tuple is iterable,
> so, it doesn't break the assumption that tuple is immutable.
>
> That's what I see, am I right in that?
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Alan Gauld via Tutor <tutor at python.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 02/08/17 20:01, C W wrote:
>>
>> > I am a little confused about why Tuple can be sorted.
>> >
>> > Suppose I have the following,
>> >
>> >> aTuple = (9, 3, 7, 5)
>> >> sorted(aTuple)
>> > [3, 5, 7, 9]
>>
>> sorted() returns a new object.
>> The original tuple has not been changed
>>  - print aTuple to confirm this.
>>
>> HTH
>> --
>> Alan G
>> Author of the Learn to Program web site
>> http://www.alan-g.me.uk/
>> http://www.amazon.com/author/alan_gauld
>> Follow my photo-blog on Flickr at:
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/alangauldphotos
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tutor maillist  -  Tutor at python.org
>> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
>>
>
>