On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:07:33AM +0800, qhlonline wrote:
Hi, all I have a suggestion that, the sort() member method of the list instance, should return the 'self' as the result of list.sort() call.
Having list.sort() and list.reverse() return self is a perfectly good design. The advantage is you can write things like this: list.sort().reverse() but the disadvantage is that it may fool people into thinking it returns a *copy* of the list. Python avoids that trap by returning None, so that you cannot write: sorted_items = items.sort() but instead people write: items = items.sort() so it seems that whatever we do, it will confuse some people.
Now list.sort() returns nothing, so that I can NOT write code like this:
res = {item: func(item) for item in item_list.sort()}
What is the purpose of the sort? Because dicts are unordered, the results will be no different if you just write: d = {item: func(item) for item in item_list} -- Steve