On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Greg Wilson wrote: > I would like 'min' and 'max' to be in-fix binary operators, with '__min__' > and '__max__' as the associated overloadable method names, and 'min=' and > 'max=' as the in-place forms. I find myself re-defining them in almost > every module I write, and believe that their semantics and implementation > would be unproblematic? I'm -1 on that. I'm a mathematician by schooling, and I must say max(1,2) reads much more naturally to me then 1 max 2 And "max=" just looks..... i max= 5? Come on, isn't i = max(i, 5) much more readable? Re: overloading: it is useful only for lattices, as any linear order can just use the definition max(i,j) == k iff (i==k or j==k) and i<=k and j<=k Until Python recognizes the fact that not everything is linearly ordered (AKA, rich comparisons, which should be done as a PEP really), it would be futile to deal with lattices. -- Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> There is no GOD but Python, and HTTP is its prophet. http://advogato.org/person/moshez
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