In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Fredrik Lundh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> func(*arg) instead of apply() is a step back Strongly disagree. I find func(*args) much more readable than apply(func, args). > -- it hides the fact that functions are objects, What does this have to do with anything? > and it confuses the heck out of both C/C++ programmers and > Python programmers that understand the "def func(*arg)" form, because it > looks like something it isn't (there's a false symmetry between the call-form > and the def-form). What's false about the symmetry? Call: you supply a sequence of args Def: you receive a sequence of args Lovely. > and I still do enough 1.5.2-programming to use "x = x + y"; when I find > myself in a situation where my code would benefit a lot from being able to > write "x += y" instead, I go back and fix the design. > > string methods are nice, but nothing groundbreaking, and their niceness is > almost entirely offset by the horrid "".join(seq) construct that keeps > popping > up when people take the "the string module is deprecated" yada yada too > seriously. and what do the python-devers do? they add a "sum" built-in, > but no "join"? hello? That's what you get for unsubscribing ;-) Just -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list