> Greg Wilson wrote:
> I think {:} is more consistent/mnemonic than {} for empty dictionaries
> even without sets.
What makes "{:}" so intuitive and consistent? To me, it makes no sense,
because ':' is the key/value separator and so why should I need it if there
are no items? To me, it looks like some bizarre form of the slicing syntax.
It only seems to make sense in the presence of sets, and then purely as a
way to resolve ambiguity. My feeling is that "{:}" for the empty dict is no
more consistent or meaningful than "{/}" for the empty set, maybe less so.
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
