[Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0218.txt,1.7,1.8

[akuchling@users.sourceforge.net]

Update of /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps
In directory usw-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv2201

Modified Files:
	pep-0218.txt 
Log Message:
BDFL ruling: Add section on open issues and leave it at that

Index: pep-0218.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps/pep-0218.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -C2 -d -r1.7 -r1.8
*** pep-0218.txt	13 Oct 2002 21:02:35 -0000	1.7
--- pep-0218.txt	15 Oct 2002 00:24:12 -0000	1.8
***************
*** 122,125 ****
--- 122,144 ----
  
  
+ Open Issues for the Long-Term Proposal
+ 
+     Earlier drafts of PEP 218 had only a single set type, but the
+     sets.py implementation in Python 2.3 has two, Set and
+     ImmutableSet.  The long-term proposal has a single built-in
+     conversion function, set(iterable); how should instances of a
+     built-in immutable set type be created?  Possibilities include a
+     second immutable_set() built-in, or perhaps the set() function
+     could take an additional argument,
+     e.g. set(iterable, immutable=True)?
+ 
+     The PEP proposes {1,2,3} as the set notation and {-} for the empty
+     set.  Would there be different syntax for an immutable and a
+     mutable set?  Perhaps the built-in syntax would only be for
+     mutable sets, and an immutable set would be created from a mutable
+     set using the appropriate built-in function,
+     e.g. immutable_set({1,2,3}).
+ 
+ 
  Short-Term Proposal