Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #38637
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder3.xlned.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.000 |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'syntax': 0.03; 'explicitly': 0.04; 'context': 0.05; 'constructor': 0.07; 'correct.': 0.07; 'function,': 0.07; 'remaining': 0.07; 'python': 0.09; 'immutable': 0.09; 'literal': 0.09; 'mutable': 0.09; 'notation': 0.09; 'subject:while': 0.09; 'survive': 0.09; 'to:addr:comp.lang.python': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.10; "wouldn't": 0.11; '(list)': 0.16; 'confusion': 0.16; 'denotes': 0.16; 'frozenset': 0.16; 'hypothetical': 0.16; 'syntax,': 0.16; 'syntax.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'typical': 0.17; 'solution.': 0.18; 'define': 0.20; 'object.': 0.22; 'cc:2**0': 0.23; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.25; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'chris': 0.28; 'grouping': 0.29; 'oop': 0.29; 'them?': 0.29; 'array': 0.29; 'basic': 0.30; 'symbol': 0.33; 'problem': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.34; 'built-in': 0.35; 'mapping': 0.35; 'sequence': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'enough': 0.36; 'why': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'some': 0.38; 'apply': 0.39; 'list,': 0.39; 'remove': 0.61; 'include:': 0.61; '2013': 0.84; 'complexity': 0.84; 'dict,': 0.84 |
| X-Received | by 10.49.84.167 with SMTP id a7mr827618qez.11.1360548546178; Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:09:06 -0800 (PST) |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Date | Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:09:06 -0800 (PST) |
| In-Reply-To | <mailman.1570.1360471828.2939.python-list@python.org> |
| Complaints-To | groups-abuse@google.com |
| Injection-Info | glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.196.109.207; posting-account=h3aEwQoAAACiuqX-oR3gvCVFm8lLHoWj |
| References | <mailman.2132.1342341291.4697.python-list@python.org> <5002a1f9$0$29995$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.2141.1342369188.4697.python-list@python.org> <7b027612-a07e-40f9-8ad2-3e95c5440482@googlegroups.com> <mailman.2148.1342375350.4697.python-list@python.org> <bbc44546-ffb7-4ff9-bd43-3bfa068df75f@googlegroups.com> <mailman.2154.1342389192.4697.python-list@python.org> <86872ad2-fda0-403b-9f18-d1cb18e41860@t32g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmov--b_s5e=OYsWWV8w6byj5a+28NNu-vRWGV8mr8w5cg@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.2159.1342404957.4697.python-list@python.org> <50039290$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.2197.1342498752.4697.python-list@python.org> <9309333c-13a0-464c-bd94-9c682363b8c9@googlegroups.com> <511516db$0$29969$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <ee71b775-b527-4bb3-a080-12aad962b0ba@googlegroups.com> <62c3e7bb-d023-43b4-b759-f424707fd346@googlegroups.com> <mailman.1521.1360368357.2939.python-list@python.org> <75c82449-773e-4077-a6c9-e9cef08f845f@googlegroups.com> <CALwzidm7vg3ucvgm=TzAjQyS8VBWY6ouK0himZ45mPpPL+e-UA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.1533.1360386069.2939.python-list@python.org> <13e5e306-d253-418e-a1b2-ac5bde03f07d@googlegroups.com> <mailman.1570.1360471828.2939.python-list@python.org> |
| User-Agent | G2/1.0 |
| X-Google-Web-Client | true |
| X-Google-IP | 70.196.109.207 |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Subject | Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements |
| From | Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> |
| To | comp.lang.python@googlegroups.com |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | quoted-printable |
| Cc | python-list@python.org |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.15 |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1620.1360549057.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 56 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1360549057 news.xs4all.nl 6896 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:33224 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.python:38637 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On Saturday, February 9, 2013 10:50:25 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote:
> [...]
> I don't understand. Wouldn't freezing an array (list) result in a
> tuple? And, why should there be no literal syntax for them?
>
> Having a convenient literal notation for every basic type is extremely
> handy.
Actually i must admit that you are correct. Of course the problem with literal syntax is symbol congestion. But i have a solution. A solution that can survive the limited number of grouping chars that python employs now. Except, i will define them explicitly
{}: denotes ANY mapping object.
[]: denotes ANY mutable sequence object.
(): denotes ANY immutable sequence object.
<>: Hmm, there must be a good use for this one!
The key to removing complexity is to declare the literal syntax much the way Python "represents" a "set". Observe:
py> set([1,2,3])
set([1,2,3])
Using this syntax we can apply "grouping" chars in proper context when writing literal syntax. The only problem is how do we make this syntax unique enough to avoid confusion and complexity??? Some hypothetical literal syntax, "syntaxes", include:
<set>[1,2,3] # Set literal
<set>(1,2,3) # FrozenSet literal
set=>[1,2,3] # Set literal
set=>(1,2,3) # FrozenSet literal
set::[1,2,3] # Set literal
set::(1,2,3) # FrozenSet literal
set<[1,2,3]> # Set literal
set<(1,2,3)> # FrozenSet literal
<set[1,2,3]> # Set literal
<set(1,2,3)> # FrozenSet literal
set([1,2,3]) # Set literal
set((1,2,3)) # FrozenSet literal
...and to avoid conflicts with the "set" function, we just remove the set function! Only the types list, dict, and tuple(bka:StaticList!) should have a built-in constructor function, the remaining should have a typical OOP style constructor:
mySet = Set([1,2,3])
mySetLiteral = set([1,2,3])
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 22:16 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 23:27 -0700
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 22:32 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 22:32 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-02-09 02:16 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 09:48 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-02-08 12:58 -0500
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 11:58 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 11:05 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 16:49 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 12:17 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 20:54 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-10 16:04 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 04:28 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 23:50 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 05:28 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-12 00:52 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 20:24 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 20:24 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 05:28 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 04:28 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 20:54 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 18:29 -0700
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 16:01 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 20:26 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-10 15:50 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-10 18:09 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-10 18:09 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-02-10 22:37 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-02-10 09:45 -0500
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2013-02-10 18:06 +0100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 04:18 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 23:40 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 05:13 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-12 00:35 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 20:00 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 20:00 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-11 17:06 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-12 16:55 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-12 09:48 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-13 08:24 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-12 18:43 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-12 18:43 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-15 13:12 -0700
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-02-16 11:12 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-12 09:48 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-11 17:06 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 05:13 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2013-02-15 21:09 +0200
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 20:26 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 16:49 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-08 18:06 -0700
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 22:25 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-09 22:25 -0800
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-02-09 14:16 +1100
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-02-09 15:36 -0500
Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-02-11 21:12 -0800
csiph-web