On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 11:18 PM Steven D'Aprano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 09:18:40PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > While it's tempting, it does create an awkward distinction.
> >
> > f(1, 2, 3) # look up f, call it with parameters
> > f[1, 2, 3] # look up f, subscript it with paramters
> > f{1, 2, 3} # construct a frozenset
>
> You forgot
>
> f"1, 2, {x+1}" # eval some code and construct a string
>
> Not to mention:
>
> r(1, 2, 3) # look up r, call it with parameters
> r[1, 2, 3] # look up r, subscript it
> r"1, 2, 3" # a string literal
Strings behave differently in many many ways. Are there any non-string
types that differ?
> Reading this makes my eyes bleed:
>
> >>> <1, 2, 3> < <1, 2, 3, 4>
> True
Fair point, but I can't imagine people comparing two literals like
that. It's not quite as bad if you replace the left side with a
variable or calculation, though it's still kinda weird.
> > Unfortunately there aren't many symbols available, and Python's kinda
> > locked into a habit of using just one at each end (rather than, say,
> > (<1, 2, 3>) or something), so choices are quite limited.
>
> Triple quoted strings say hello :-)
See above, strings are different, and people treat them differently.
> {{1, 2, 3}} would work, since that's currently a runtime error. But I
> prefer the f{} syntax.
>
Yeah, I think that ship has sailed. Double punctuation just isn't
Python's thing, so there aren't really any good ways to shoehorn more
data types into fewer symbols.
ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/PMK36CYTHNNJEEDBPEO5T3RN6PCZZVZO/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
