On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote: > ALl of which is isomorphic to Steven's point that forty is less > eyeballable than 40 > > And mine that ∅ is more eyeballable than set([])
I don't disagree that it is; the short tokens are easier to read in quantity. I just don't think that it's sufficient to justify piles of new and hard-to-look-up operators and things. (And a literal notation for an empty set would be a good thing. If I were designing a Python-like language from scratch now, I'd probably differentiate sets and dictionaries better, which would allow each one to have its own empty literal.) ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
