Greg Ward wrote:
>
> On 06 March 2002, Raymond Hettinger said:
> > Before I send generator comprehension portion to Guido for
> > pronouncement, I would like to get all of your votes +1 or -1 on just
> > the part about Generator Comprehensions.
>
> Well, since the proposal is four orthogonal ideas, may I vote multiple
> times? Here goes...
Nice template :-)
> -1 on new x{map,filter,...} builtins -- feels like too much at once
FWIW, mxTools provides an xmap() implementation and I've never
used it once... so:
-0 for the core
+0 as extension
> +0.5 on indexed() as a builtin
+1, though I'd prefer an iterator here (over a generator).
> +1 on generator comprehensions; I favour the brackets
> -0 on generater parameter passing, -1 on the particular syntax chosen
> -0 on generater exception passing, -1 on using "throw"
-0 on those; generators don't work for me as concept... too
much magic under the hood.
--
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
______________________________________________________________________
Company & Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/
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