RE: IMPORTANT need quick feedback on radical change

Greg Ewing wrote:

>Martin Christensen <[email protected]>:
>
>> This distinction between lists at tuples exists merely by 
>convention, 
>> and even then it's not consistently used.
>
>I think that most of the inconsistency (when it's not simply due to
>ignorance) is because there are two independent reasons for 
>wanting to use a tuple in Python. One is because conceptually 
>you want a record-like rather than a collection-like 
>structure; the other is because you want something that's 
>hashable for use as a dict key. Sometimes these two 
>requirements are in conflict with each other.
>
>If there existed both mutable and immutable tuples, and both 
>mutable and immutable lists, this conflict would disappear, 
>and I think the use of tuples and lists could be made more 
>consistent (given sufficient user education).
>
>Whether it's really worth maintaing the two types and 
>associated language syntax I'm not sure.

I'm confident that it is not worth the trouble to have two types for Bytes
data.  I'm going to move the Wiki proposal that says there is one immutable
type to the APPROVED list.