On 10/13/2019 5:57 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 07:20:29PM -0000, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
Failing fast is good, but it is also a very common case to want to add
an item to a collection regardless of whether it is set-like or
sequence-like.
Is that correct though? To the best of my memory, I've never wanted to
add an item to a list-or-set in 15 years, nor have I seen code in
practice that does so. I don't think it is "very common", but I would
like to see some examples of your code, and third-party libraries, which
do this.
On a few occasions I have modified code that used lists to instead use
sets. Generally I was porting very old code, before sets were built in,
so lists had been used. However, sets were more appropriate when I
refactoring. It would have saved me some hassle had lists and sets
worked the same way as far as adding members. But I can't say it's very
common.
I don't think I've ever seen code that wanted to use duck-typing for
adding an element/item to a container. I'm sure it exists, but probably
is not very common.
Eric
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/CG6YU46SNMZBXMVOOB2LJXUW7KVEIGRD/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
