Paul Rubin <no.em...@nospam.invalid> writes: > Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> writes: > > but, if there is no ‘set’ type, it's fine to write:: > > sorted(foolist) == sorted(barlist) > > what about dictionaries?
Creating a needless dict for each list would make the code even less clear, I'd think. (We're talking here about design, which is why clarity of communicating semantic intent is a concern.) Of course, the ‘set’ type is an even clearer way of communicating the intent; so, the above doesn't need to work in Python 3, which can break code written before the advent of the ‘set’ type. -- \ “But Marge, what if we chose the wrong religion? Each week we | `\ just make God madder and madder.” —Homer, _The Simpsons_ | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
