Le 02/03/2014 13:32, Ian Kelly a écrit : > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Eric Jacoboni <eric.jacob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> In fact, i think i'm gonna forget += on lists :) > > Well, do what you want, but I think you're taking the wrong lesson > from this. Don't forget about using += on lists. Instead, forget > about using assignments, augmented or otherwise, on tuple elements. > Would you expect this to work?
Well, the thing about += on lists that makes me forget it, like i said in my previous post, is that its behaviour is not consistent with +. Don't get me wrong: i don't expect that modifying a tuple element works. That's exactly my point: my initial question was, why it "half works : it should not work at all". I was thinking that += on lists worked like update() or extend() : modifying lists in place... It was my mistake So, yes, i still don't get the point using a += operation, which is not even consistent with the + operation (see my exemple on "spam" in my previous post). The + operator to return the modified list and the update() or extend() methods to do in place replacements are well enough for my present needs. Maybe, in the future, i will find a use case of += for lists which is not covered by others methods, though... Who knows? I don't doubt that Python designers have made this choice and this behavior for a good reason: i've just not get it yet. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
