twic at urchin.earth.li
Sun Nov 13 18:57:48 CET 2005
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005, Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote:
> bearophileHUGS at lycos.com wrote:
>> Tom Anderson:
>>> And we're halfway to looking like perl already! Perhaps a more
>>> pythonic thing would be to define a "then" operator:
>>> all_lines = file1 then file2 then file3
>> Or a "chain" one:
>> all_lines = file1 chain file2 chain file3
This may just be NIH syndrome, but i like that much less - 'then' makes
for something that reads much more naturally to me. 'and' would be even
better, but it's taken; 'andthen' is a bit unwieldy.
Besides, "chain file2" is going to confuse people coming from a BASIC
> That's certainly not better than the chain() function. Introducing new
> operators for just one application is not pythonic.
True, but would this be for just one application With python moving
towards embracing a lazy functional style, with generators and genexps,
maybe chaining iterators is a generally useful operation that should be
supported at the language level. I'm not seriously suggesting doing this,
but i don't think it's completely out of the question.
limited to concepts that are meta, generic, abstract and philosophical --
IEEE SUO WG
More information about the Python-list