Moshe Zadka wrote: > > What would people think about xmap(), which acts anologously to xrange(), > IOW calculate lazilly instead of eagerly? Or even, calculate "on demand", > without caching: > .... > Wouldn't this solve the parallel iteration problem? I don't think that using a function called "xmap" to build tuples is very intuitive to start with. What's so wrong with a builtin called "tuples()"? -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4