On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 1:24 PM, MRAB <pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote: > On 02/10/2010 20:50, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >> >> On 02 Oct 2010 04:38:16 GMT, Steven D'Aprano >> <st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> declaimed the following in >> gmane.comp.python.general: >> >> >>> If so, then we haven't gained anything, and the only thing that would >>> satisfy such people would be for every function name and operator to be >>> unique -- something which is impossible in practice, even if it were >>> desirable. >>> >> Well... We could maybe borrow from REXX... and use || >> for >> concatenation. >> >> Of course, REXX has the minor idiosyncrasy that everything is a >> string unless the context needs a numeric... >> >> -=-=-=-=-- >> C:\Documents and Settings\Dennis Lee Bieber>rexx >> x = 3 >> y = "this" >> z = "that" >> say y z >> say y x >> say y || z >> say y || x >> ^Z >> this that >> this 3 >> thisthat >> this3 >> >> C:\Documents and Settings\Dennis Lee Bieber> >> -=-=-=-=-- > > How about "~", which is currently has only a unary form: > >>>> "foo" ~ "bar" > 'foobar' >>>> [1, 2, 3] ~ [4, 5, 6] > [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] > > Think of it as meaning "followed by". > > Actually, I wonder if it could also be used with generators to mean > itertools.chain: > >>>> r1 = range(3) >>>> r2 = range(3, 6) >>>> for x in r1 ~ r2: > print(x) > > > 0 > 1 > 2 > 3 > 4 > 5
I'd actually love the ability to overload this, although I'm not sold on the itertools.chain thing. To me it looks a lot like the 'is isomorphic' operator from graph theory, and we could really use that in Graphine. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list