Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Well we could have list(a) return [a], and have a list_from_iterable.
> Although I would prefer a different name.
Or reverse it - list() always takes a single iterable, and
list_from_scalars() is defined something like follows:
>>> def list_from_scalars(*args):
retu
Op 2006-01-18, Diez B. Roggisch schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Giovanni Bajo schrieb:
>> Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>>
due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list comprehensions
with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested parentheses; it basically
just replaces brackets wi
Steve Holden schrieb:
> Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>>> due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list
>>> comprehensions with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested
>>> parentheses; it basically just replaces brackets with parentheses.
>>
>>
>> But you don't need the nested parentheses - u
Giovanni Bajo schrieb:
> Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>
>>> due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list comprehensions
>>> with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested parentheses; it basically
>>> just replaces brackets with parentheses.
>> But you don't need the nested parentheses - use *
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>>due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list comprehensions
>>with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested parentheses; it basically
>>just replaces brackets with parentheses.
>
>
> But you don't need the nested parentheses - use *args instead for the
> lis
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>> due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list comprehensions
>> with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested parentheses; it basically
>> just replaces brackets with parentheses.
>
> But you don't need the nested parentheses - use *args instead for the
> list-c
> due to the nested parentheses. Note that replacing list comprehensions
> with list(...) doesn't introduce any nested parentheses; it basically
> just replaces brackets with parentheses.
But you don't need the nested parentheses - use *args instead for the
list-constructor.
list(a,b,c)
Apar
Tom Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds good. More generally, i'd be more than happy to get rid of list
> comprehensions, letting people use list(genexp) instead. That would
> obviously be a Py3k thing, though.
Alex Martelli wrote:
> I fully agree, but the BDFL has already (tentativel
