> [In this tuple] > dodge_city = (1781, 1870, 1823) > (population, feet_above_sea_level, establishment_year) = dodge_city > each index in the sequence implies something very > different about each value. The semantic meaning > of each index is *more* than just the position in > the sequence; it matters *for interpreting that > component*, and that component would not mean the > same thing in a different index position. A tuple > is the right choice, for that reason.
I think I would have difficulty holding a position that this should not be a class (or equivalent via namedtuple()) or a dict. It seems to me like a case could be made that there are far more situations where it makes sense to use tuples as immutable sequences than as objects whose attributes are named implicitly by an index. This dodge_city definitely does not seem to me like a good candidate for a plain tuple. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list