Jeremy Fincher <fincher.8 at osu.edu> writes: > On Tuesday 02 December 2003 11:02 am, Paul Moore wrote: >> Alex Martelli <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes: >> > Since these functions or types are going to be in operator, I think >> > we can afford to "spend" two names to distinguish functionality >> > (even though attgetter and itemgetter look nowhere as neat as >> > extract -- I don't have better suggestions offhand). >> >> operator.getattr and operator.getitem? > > I think the functions they're talking about are actually right-curried > versions of those functions, like this: I know - I was hoping that the fact that these particular versions were in the operator module might justify using the same name for two mildly-related things. But it's probably more confusing than helpful. Paul -- This signature intentionally left blank
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