[Python-3000] PEP 3138- String representation in Python 3000

["Martin v. Löwis"]

>>   output_to = compressors[name](compresslevel=complevel)
>>
> Your example seems to indicate a model->sequence operation, that I would
> call 'encode'.  Now the question becomes, given 'f', what makes more sense:
> 
>     (a)  y = x.transform(f)
>     (b)  y = x.encode(f)
>     (c)  y = f(x)
> 
> What do you expect the function signature of 'output_to' to be?

People brought that up in the context of stacking streams. So output_to
would have a stream interface, so you would say

   (d) output_to.write(x)

(and yes, I do recognize that the ultimate receiver of the output,
e.g. the socket or such, is missing in my API)

> Is it
> callable?  Is it something that is going to be a stream wrapper, that
> has .read() and .write()?

That's what I meant it to be.

I'm not quite sure why you are asking these questions.

> In this case using .transform() would seem to be a good fit because
> there is no model, but 'obj' suffers from being directionless, so it
> becomes this...
> 
>     ciph = plain.transform(obj.encrypt)
> 
> ...which isn't substantially clearer than...
> 
>     ciph = obj.encrypt(plain)

It isn't substantially clearer, and *therefore* it is a good fit???

> Parametric transformations don't bother me, but that would be an
> indication that there's a lot more going on, and perhaps there are
> better (and pre-existing) labels for these functions.

If you are saying that we should call it .encrypt, not .transform:
I completely agree.

Regards,
Martin