On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Abe Dillon <abedil...@gmail.com> wrote: > [Chris Angelico] >> >> In English, "card is not wild" can >> be interpreted as a membership check, but in Python, it is only an >> identity check; you're capitalizing on false readability by using this >> notation. > > > I promise that wasn't my intent. Since both my proposed form and the lambda > form use the same expression, > it doesn't really tip the balance in favor of my argument. Also, most toy > card problems I work with use a finite, > immutable set of cards, so identity checking isn't *that* weird.
Fair enough. To be fair, I use decks of cards primarily for non-game usage (for instance, teaching data structures and algorithms - cards laid out on a table can represent a tree, heap, array, etc), and my decks of cards are artistic. A deck containing four suits of thirteen cards plus one joker would have 53 cards, which is a prime number; printing 54 cards lets you lay them out as 9 by 6 on a sheet, so it's easy to add a second joker. Some decks (I have an Alice in Wonderland themed deck) have *four* jokers. As such, the most logical way to do this would be as an attribute of the card. Its jokerness is as much a feature as the clubness of another card. You can pick up a physical card, look at it, and say "This is a joker"; you don't have to see if it's in a list of specific known jokers. hand = sorted(cards, by=value[card.suit] if not card.wild else max_value with card) Honestly, though, it'd usually be more interesting to sort by rank within suit. What you're doing here would group the cards by suit, ignoring their ranks; more useful would be: hand = sorted(cards, key=lambda card: (card.is_wild, card.suit, card.rank)) Much cleaner. No conditionals needed. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
