[Python-ideas] Suggested MapView object (Re: __len__() for map())
steve at pearwood.info
Tue Dec 11 20:24:27 EST 2018
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:31:03AM +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >I suggest we provide a separate mapview() type that offers only the lazy
> >sequence API, without trying to be an iterator at the same time.
> Then we would be back to the bad old days of having two functions
> that do almost exactly the same thing.
They aren't "almost exactly the same thing". One is a sequence, which is
a rich API that includes random access to items and a length; the other
is an iterator, which is an intentionally simple API which fails to meet
the needs of some users.
> My suggestion was made in
> the interests of moving the language in the direction of having
> less warts, rather than adding more or moving the existing ones
> I acknowledge that the dual interface is itself a bit wartish,
It's a "bit wartish" in the same way that the sun is "a bit warmish".
> but it's purely for backwards compatibility
And it fails at that too.
x = map(str.upper, "abcd")
x is iter(x)
returns True with the current map, an actual iterator, and False with
Current map() is a proper, non-broken iterator; your hybrid is a broken
iterator. (That's not me being derogative: its the official term for
iterators which don't stay exhausted.)
I'd be more charitable if I thought the flaws were mere bugs that could
be fixed. But I don't think there is any way to combine two incompatible
interfaces, the sequence and iterator APIs, into one object without
these sorts of breakages.
Take the __next__ method out of your object, and it is a better version
of what I proposed earlier. With the __next__ method, its just broken.
More information about the Python-ideas