Re: Big last minute change to 1.0

Brian Quinlan wrote:

> You mean that the first element addition operation would cause the
> type to crystalize into either a set or a dict and then that type
> would be fixed for the lifetime of the object, right?
>
> Even then it feels a bit skanky. What was your rational for not using
> {} for empty dictionaries and {-} for empty sets?

It doesn't feel skanky if you think of a dictionary as a set of tuples with
each tuple a key/value pair.

I'm in the process of making that analogy literal.  I'm trying to figure out
how to make a dictionary an extension of a set so that all the set methods
work on dictionaries.  If I succeed, a lot of Dict methods will dissapear
and be replaced by the Set methods it inherits.

I always wondered why Python chose "for x in dict" to return keys instead of
tuples.  I originally implemented Prothon to return tuples and had to "fix"
it later to make it Python compatible.  If I make Dict an extension of a
Set, then the "in" behavior will be inherited and it will return a tuple
again.

P.S.  I also hate {-}