2017-05-05 0:20 GMT+02:00 Greg Ewing :
> While most uses would probably be for short strings, I can
> think of uses cases involving large ones. For example, to
> format a hex dump into lines with 8 bytes per line and spaces
> between the lines:
For such specialized use case, write a C extension.
Victor Stinner wrote:
I prefer str.join() approach: write a single chunks() function which
takes a sequence, instead of modifying all sequence types around the
world ;-)
Even if a general sequence-chunking function is thought useful,
it might be worth providing a special-purpose one as a string
> How about adding a chunks() and rchunks() function to sequences:
>
> [1,2,3,4,5,6,7].chunks(3) => [[1,2,3], [4,5,6], [7]]
I prefer str.join() approach: write a single chunks() function which
takes a sequence, instead of modifying all sequence types around the
world ;-)
It's less natural to writ
On 4 May 2017 at 18:59, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Currently, given a frame object (e.g. from sys._getframe or
> inspect.getouterframes), there's no way to get back to the function
> object that created it. This creates an obstacle for various sorts of
> introspection. In particular, in
Hi all,
Currently, given a frame object (e.g. from sys._getframe or
inspect.getouterframes), there's no way to get back to the function
object that created it. This creates an obstacle for various sorts of
introspection. In particular, in the unusual but real situation where
you need to "mark" a f
