Empty sequence

I know I can do seq([]), but is there a particular reason seq() isn’t supported?

[EntilZha]

The idea to have a default doesn’t necessarily mean an equivalent way of doing it is bad style-wise. The reason for not doing sequence=[] is because the array is then a singleton across all calls, which leads to very weird behavior. The right way to implement this pattern, is to set sequence=None and then have a if sequence is None check, if so then set sequence = []. In this particular case, I don’t think you’d need to change the Sequence code since the type error is thrown in _parse_args and the Sequence constructor usually isn’t called by users, rather by the library itself.

Back to the question of whether you should be able to call seq() with arguments, I can get behind the argument of mirroring set() and list() in returning an empty sequence. The example stephan gave also seems like a reasonable use case for this.

Given that, I’d welcome a PR that modifies the len(args) == 0 code section to instead initialize to an empty sequence. I think that is probably the only change needed, but its possible I’m missing something

[Kache]

merged!