Mike Meyer enlightened us with:
> Is there any place in the language that still requires tuples
> instead of sequences, except for use as dictionary keys?
Anything that's an immutable sequence of numbers. For instance, a pair
of coordinates. Or a value and a weight for that value.
> If not, then it's not clear that tuples as a distinct data type
> still serves a purpose in the language. In which case, I think it's
> appropriate to consider doing away with tuples.
I really disagree. There are countless examples where adding or
removing elements from a list just wouldn't be right.
> The new intended use is as an immutable sequence type, not a
> "lightweight C struct".
It's the same, really. A lightweight list of elements, where each
element has its own meaning, is both an immutable sequence as well as
a lightweight C struct.
Sybren
--
The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be a
capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
Frank Zappa
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
