Vladimir Marangozov wrote:
>
> I don't feel comfortable with it. Period.
> You might want to see what http://www.dict.org has to say about it.
>
> Looking at the examples for this builtin function, and without thinking
> too much about the name, I'd call it - fold().
Please, don't!!! As far as I can remember, fold is the "reduce of the
functional languages". At least it is that in Haskell.
Here's a quote from the Journal of Functional Programming (July 1999):
"In functional programming, fold is a standard operator that
encapsulates a simple pattern of recursion for processing lists."
BTW: I still like zip() and as someone said: dir and del have
the same problem/not-a-problem
Peter
--
Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331
Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de
N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de
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