> And that your > insisting on ``c[:]()`` instead of just ``c()`` seems to indicate you want > a change that is quite surprising. It would mean that a slice of a list > returns an other type with the __call__ method implemented.
I am not insisting on anything. I use ``c[:]()`` as shorthand way of saying "c() for c in d where d is a container" Having c() support containers seems obvious to me. It jibes with duck typing. Perhaps the title of this thread should have been: "Why don't containers quack?" A change is surprising only if it breaks something. I still haven't seen any code that breaks by making such a change. Seeing such code would teach a great deal. > Grok The Zen of Python (``import this`` at the interpreter prompt)? I think this is incredibly cool. > Write "pythonic" code? Probably not yet; I'm still learning - I have yet to perfect my silly walk. http://grampyshouse.net/cliches/images/sillywalk.jpg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
