Passing a callable object to Thread

[Lie]

On Feb 16, 12:29 pm, Jeff Schwab <j... at schwabcenter.com> wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
> > Jeff Schwab <j... at schwabcenter.com> writes:
> >> Why not?  They seem intuitive to me.  I would find it weird if you
> >> couldn't have 0-tuple, and even weirder if you couldn't have a
> >> 1-tuple.   Maybe my brain has been warped by too much C++ code.
>
> > The idea is that a 2-tuple (of numbers, say) is a pair of numbers, a
> > 3-tuple is three numbers, and a 1-tuple is one number.  That would
> > mean a number and a 1-tuple of numbers are the same thing, not
> > separate types.
>
> No, that doesn't follow.  A set with one element is not the same thing
> as that element, a sequence of one element is not the same thing as that
> element, and a tuple with one element is not the same thing as that element.

Probably the analogue of tuples in human language would be like this:
A: What ice-cream flavour do you have?
B: "Vanilla", "Chocolate", and "Strawberry"

If, for example, he only have Vanilla:
A: What ice-cream flavour do you have?
B: "Vanilla"

This way of thinking makes 1-tuple the same as the element itself.