-
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime
I think it looks hideous, but it works. Hell, to define a literal tuple sometimes it's MANDATORY, like: foo = (1,)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XaiaX
well you don't use it on single line constructs where it looks hideous obviously, at least when it's optional
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
Yeah I think the comma-less alternative there would be like tuple([1]), which ... gross.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @XaiaX @chaosprime
Although, I'm slightly annoyed that the empty primitives are '', "", [], {}, (), and set() ಠ_ಠ
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @XaiaX
keyword-based literal constructors? what the fuck is this, PHP
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
The problem is that sets and dictionaries would both be {}. { 'a' : 1, 'b' : 2 } vs. {1,2} I would've voted for {} and {,} or something.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @XaiaX
enh, dicts aren't hashable so you can't use them as dict keys, so just make sets {{}}
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
so you see it has a great deal to recommend it
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
