On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Zero Piraeus <schesis@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Note that my example was an any_close() function, not an all_close()
one. I doubt anyone's seriously going to suggest adding *three* new
functions, so anyone who wants something like that will by necessity
end up rolling their own.
OK -- that is pretty compelling --- I have been looking for use-cases for where having a symmetrical test would be a clear advantage, and this is one.
But this is where I'm unclear -- is this "any_close" function something you think is a real use case -- i.e. you have needed such a thing, or think there is a strong chance that you will. Or just something that _could_ be done.
Granted, I think your point is that if it _could_ be done, there is a good chance that _someone_ will do it -- and with that in mind we want as few surprising behaviors in the standard lib as possible.
But it would be even more compelling if it were a real use case ;-)
Anyway, it seems that Steven is going to write up something to clarify the issues, and I'll try to write the various options up in the PEP, and then we can suss out which options are acceptable to most folks.
-Chris
--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer
Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception