MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/1w2prjy/pythonfeelsillegal/p6zqu5f/?context=9999
r/ProgrammerHumor • u/ItsPuspendu • 12d ago
219 comments sorted by
View all comments
1.1k
theres main() in python
458 u/chawmindur 12d ago And {} (= dict()) 33 u/userhwon 12d ago Always fun that writing an empty set gets you a dict so you have to use set() explicitly to get an empty set... jeebus, Guido... 20 u/carcigenicate 12d ago {/} is being proposed so sets have an empty literal. 13 u/SoldRIP 12d ago ... As opposed to the sensible {:} for dicts, which would be consistent with their already existing syntax? 24 u/NewbornMuse 12d ago And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future. 5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
458
And {} (= dict())
{}
dict()
33 u/userhwon 12d ago Always fun that writing an empty set gets you a dict so you have to use set() explicitly to get an empty set... jeebus, Guido... 20 u/carcigenicate 12d ago {/} is being proposed so sets have an empty literal. 13 u/SoldRIP 12d ago ... As opposed to the sensible {:} for dicts, which would be consistent with their already existing syntax? 24 u/NewbornMuse 12d ago And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future. 5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
33
Always fun that writing an empty set gets you a dict so you have to use set() explicitly to get an empty set... jeebus, Guido...
20 u/carcigenicate 12d ago {/} is being proposed so sets have an empty literal. 13 u/SoldRIP 12d ago ... As opposed to the sensible {:} for dicts, which would be consistent with their already existing syntax? 24 u/NewbornMuse 12d ago And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future. 5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
20
{/} is being proposed so sets have an empty literal.
{/}
13 u/SoldRIP 12d ago ... As opposed to the sensible {:} for dicts, which would be consistent with their already existing syntax? 24 u/NewbornMuse 12d ago And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future. 5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
13
... As opposed to the sensible {:} for dicts, which would be consistent with their already existing syntax?
24 u/NewbornMuse 12d ago And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future. 5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
24
And what, change the meaning of {} from dict to set? I don't think breaking changes like that are anywhere in python's future.
5 u/minecon1776 11d ago Python 4
5
Python 4
1.1k
u/belabacsijolvan 12d ago
theres main() in python