> False. I stand corrected.
> Or are you saying that only classes specifically derived from list, > tuple, or dict should be considered, and custom containers that are > not derived from any of those but implement the correct protocols > should be excluded? If so, that sounds less than ideal. That might be a desirable constraint from an implementational/ performance aspect anyway, but I agree, less than ideal. Either way, its not hard to add some detail to the semantics to allow all this. Even this function definition: def func(Foo(args), Foo(kwargs)) ...could even be defined unambigiously by overloading first on base type, and if that does not uniquely determine the args and kwargs, fall back on positionality, so that: def func(Foo(args), dict(kwargs)) def func(list(args), Foo(kwargs)) would be uniquely defined as well. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
