My double dot was a typo on my tablet, not borrowing Julia syntax, in this case.
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 6:43 PM David Mertz <me...@gnosis.cx wrote: > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 6:23 PM Christopher Barker > >> a_list_of_strings.strip().lower().title() >> >> is a lot nicer than: >> >> [s.title() for s in (s.lower() for s in [s.strip(s) for s in >> a_list_of_strings])] >> >> or >> >> list(map(str.title, (map(str.lower, (map(str.strip, a_list_of_strings)))) >> # untested >> > > I'm warming up some. But is this imagined as vectors of strings, or as > generically homogeneous objects? And what is homogeneity exactly in the > face of duck typing? > > Absent the vector wrapping, I think I might write this for your example: > > map(lambda s: s..strip().lower().title(), a_list_of_strings) > > That's slightly longer, but just by the length of the word lambda. > > One could write a wrapper to vectorize pretty easily. So maybe: > > Vector(a_list_of_strings).strip().lower().title() > > This would just pass along the methods to the individual items, and > wouldn't need to think about typing per se. Maybe other objects happen to > have those three methods, so are string-like in a duck way. > > >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
