Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Does anyone know what builtin or stdlib objects iterators fail to
> implement `__iter__`? I haven't been able to find any -- all the obvious
> examples do (map, filter, reversed, zip, generators, list iterators,
> set iterators, etc).
Could it possibly be... the async it
Hi Evpok,
Evpok Padding wrote:
> Hi,
> All apologies if it has been clarified earlier, but if you dislike nested
> method calls what is wrong with operating on generators as in
No worries! I think the theme of this discussion is using idioms
from map, reduce + functions from itertools module them
Hi Stephen,
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> 1. Is dataflow/fluent programming distinguishable from whatever it
> was that Guido didn't like about method chaining idioms? If so,
> how?
Are you referring to this
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038855.html?
He mentio
> > But I guess since method chaining (for collection pipeline) is more
> > commonplace across many languages, it might be easier to catch on.
> We should be careful about the terminology. Method chaining and
> pipelining are related, but independent, design patterns or idioms:
Noted and thank yo
> To me, the most natural syntax looks like this:
> value | function *args, **kwargs
> equivalent to `function(value, *args, **kwargs)` but of course we've
> already used the pipe for bitwise-or and set intersection. `>>` would be
> another equally good operator. I don't really like `|>` as an op
> I'm somewhat ambivalent about this pattern. Sometimes I find it
> readable and natural, other times it doesn't fit my intuition for the
> problem domain.
Like any other pattern, you don't have to subscribe to it and use it
to solve every problem. A pattern is just another tool in your toolbox
tha
(Fyi I am both 'Remy' and 'Raimi bin Karim', I don't know how that happened).
📌Goal
Based on the discussion in the past few days, I’d like to circle back to my
first
post to refine the goal of this proposal: to improve readability of chaining
lazy
functions (map, fi
> Function and method chaining.
> Procedural/function syntax for chains of function calls suck. It is too
> verbose (heavy on parentheses) and written backwards:
> print(sort(filter(transform(merge(extract(data)), args
To be honest, I think _this_ is the problem that I was trying to address,
w
Hi Steve,
> Reviving old threads from a decade ago is fine, if something has
> changed. Otherwise we're likely to just going to repeat the same things
> that were said a decade ago.
> Has anything changed in that time?
The theme for previous thread
(https://mail.python.org/archives/list/pytho
> This would place a burden on all iterators to implement a large
> and complex interface. This goes directly against the philosophy of
> Python protocols, which is to be as minimal as possible. Do one thing,
> and do it well.
Agreed.
> And where do you stop? You've picked an arbitrary subset of t
> It's not too hard to create your own dataflow class if you want one.
> It can start with any arbitrary iterable, and then have your map and
> filter methods just the same. Cool trick: you can even call your class
> iter! :)
> class iter:
> _get_iterator = iter # snapshot the original
> de
11 matches
Mail list logo
