On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 12:58:24 PM UTC-4, Clément Pit-Claudel wrote:
>
> On 2017-08-01 17:28, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> > Right, the main correspondence here is with "sum()": folks can't write
> > "sum(a, b, c)", but they can write "a + b + c".
> >
> > The various container constructors are also consistent in only taking
> > an iterable, with multiple explicit items being expected to use the
> > syntactic forms (e.g. [a, b, c], {a, b, c}, (a, b, c))
> >
> > The same rationale holds for any() and all(): supporting multiple
> > positional arguments would be redundant with the existing binary
> > operator syntax, with no clear reason to ever prefer one option over
> > the other.
>
> Isn't there a difference, though, insofar as we don't have a '+/sum' or
> 'and/all' equivalent of [a, b, *c]?
> You need to write 1 + 3 + sum(xs), or a and b and all(ys). Or, of course,
> any(chain([a], [b], c)), but that is not pretty.
>
a or b or any(c)
seems clear to me.
> Clément.
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> python...@python.org <javascript:>
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
