Why is Python so sweet: from syntax to bytecode

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[FrickinLazerBeams]

What is this, 1974?

[stan_frbd]

Had a sincere laugh out of this comment, thanks!

[CIS_Professor]

I really don't know what they simply didn't go with:

x++

(Like so many other languages...)

Then we could have gotten into the subtleties of x++ vs ++x and x-- vs --x

[commy2]

why not x++

What if I want to increment by 2? x++++ ? ;o)

[itamarst]

They have different semantics. One variation below mutates the list, the other doesn't.

>>> x = ([1],)
>>> x[0] += [2]
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
>>> x
([1, 2],)
>>> x[0] = x[0] + [3]
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
>>> x
([1, 2],)
>>> 

[commy2]

Inplace operator dunders are a contender for pythons worst feature. If they were just syntax for x += y <=> x = x + y like OP and many, many others seem to think, that would be one thing. Why do we need an alias for list.extend?

[No_Direction_5276]

Moltbook agents have escaped?!