Py2.3: Feedback on Sets (fwd)
Gregor Lingl
glingl at aon.at
Sat Aug 16 14:58:59 EDT 2003
David Mertz schrieb:
>>* Is there a compelling need for additional set methods like
>> Set.powerset() and Set.isdisjoint(s) or are the current
>> offerings sufficient?
>
>
> I confess that I have not used sets for anything beyond testing. I love
> the concept, but I just haven't had the need yet (especially in
> something where I want to require 2.3).
>
> The mention of Set.powerset() above is quite interesting to me. It
> feels both exciting and dangerous :-).
I think it would be more general and versatile to provide a method for
the Cantorproduct of two sets, set1.cantorproduct(set2), which could be
used to define Set.powerset.
Additionally implementing this as __mul__ and __pow__ methods, so you
could write set1*set2 and set**n would be funny.
Regards, Gregor
>
> As we all know, the size of the powerset of S, for len(S)==N, is 2**N.
> Seems like it would be really easy to run into some long runtimes and
> memory usage. Then again, power set really is a fundamental operation
> on sets. And making users rewrite it each time is error prone.
>
> So I think I would advocate it, but with a fairly harsh warning in the
> documentation about complexity issues.
>
> Yours, David...
>
> --
> mertz@ | The specter of free information is haunting the `Net! All the
> gnosis | powers of IP- and crypto-tyranny have entered into an unholy
> .cx | alliance...ideas have nothing to lose but their chains. Unite
> | against "intellectual property" and anti-privacy regimes!
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> X-Shameless-Plug: Buy Text Processing in Python: http://tinyurl.com/jskh
>
>
More information about the Python-list
mailing list