[Python-3000] Empty set and empty dictionary (original) (raw)

DillonCo dillonco at comcast.net
Mon Apr 16 19:08:23 CEST 2007

On Monday 16 April 2007, Neville Grech wrote:

Since set literals will change to for example {1,2,3} from set([1,2,3]) and set comprehensions will be specified inside {} I feel that {} will be more naturally associated with sets than dicts (or at least as much).

While the topic of set literals is around, I figure I ought to ask something that's been on my mind:

Why not use "<>" for sets? As far as I can tell, they're only currently used in "expr '<' | '>' " contexts, so it'd be easy to distinguish usages. (I think. The "[]" operators are used similarly.)

I know the traditional mathematical notation uses "{}" and having it overloaded isn't a big deal; I'm simply curious.

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list