Collections of non-arbitrary objects ?

[Steve Holden]

Paul Rubin wrote:
> Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> writes:
>> Think of a tuple as an ordered collection. A given element's ordinal
>> position indicates its semantics (meaning, significance), and
>> generally it won't make sense to iterate over the elements of a tuple
>> (though naturally that doesn't stop people, and neither does the
>> interpreter).
> 
>   def f(*a): ... 
> 
> is a fundamental language feature and really only makes sense in 
> the context of iterating over tuples.

That's true, but given that individual arguments are bound to names in 
the local namespace I'd have to argue (if I wanted to argue at all) that 
the choice of a tuple over a list was pretty arbitrary, and that it 
would actually be "more Pythonic" to allow modification of the argument 
list in the same way as sys.argv is mutable.

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden        +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd           http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb      http://del.icio.us/steve.holden
--------------- Asciimercial ------------------
Get on the web: Blog, lens and tag the Internet
Many services currently offer free registration
----------- Thank You for Reading -------------