[Python-3000] sets in P3K? (original) (raw)

Greg Wilson gvwilson at cs.utoronto.ca
Tue Apr 25 03:35:21 CEST 2006

Ian Bicking: Instead you get set([2, 3, 5, 7]), which is much less attractive and introduces an unneeded intermediate data structure. Or set((2, 3, 5, 7))... which is typographically prettier, but probably more confusing to a newbie.

Generator comprehensions + dict() were a nice alternative to dict comprehension, and also replace the need for set comprehension. I feel like there might be some clever way to constructing sets? Not that there's any direct relation to generator expressions that I can see, but maybe something in the same vein.

One of the reasons I'd like native syntax for sets is that I'd like set comprehensions:

a = {b for b in c where b > 0}

may not quite be as beautiful as using epsilon for membership (sorry, Alex ;-), but it's still quite nice.

Greg

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list