[Python-ideas] suggestion about the sort() function of the list instance

Soni L. fakedme+py at gmail.com
Tue Feb 28 19:30:37 EST 2017

On 28/02/17 09:13 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> 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}

Stateful functions?

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list