Frank Millman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > If they are all equivalent from a functional point of view, I lean > towards the second version. I agree with Rune that the third one is > nicer to read, but somehow the [:] syntax makes it a bit more obvious > what is going on.
I vastly prefer to call list(xxx) in order to obtain a new list with the same items as xxx -- couldn't be more obvious than that. You can't claim it's obvious that xxx[:] *copies* data -- because in Numeric, for example, it doesn't, it returns an array that *shares* data with xxx. So, the [:] notation sometimes copies and sometimes does not, list list(...) always copies -- if I want to ensure that a copy does happen, then list(...) is the more obvious and readable choice. Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
