list literal gotcha and suggestion

[Mark Thornton]

Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
> So, let's turn this argument on its head: Why are we trying so hard to  
> make set literals work? Why don't we just remove them from the  
> proposal? The need for them seems minor compared to lists. When the  
> collection size is small (below about a 100), O(1) lookup performance  
> is irrelevant (and even if it was relevant, due to the extra  
>   
So that we can supply them as arguments to methods that take a Set and 
onot a List or Collection, or to initialise Set typed fields.

Mark Thornton