On Saturday 04 October 2003 07:40 pm, Christian Stork wrote: > I'd like to advocate the inclusion of efficient (ie iterator-based) > predicates to the standard library. I agree. At the very least, I think such predicates should be in the itertools module. > My reasoning is that these predicate should be used in many places, > especially as part of assert statements. One of the places where I use them most, to be sure :) > def all(pred, seq): > "Returns True if pred(x) is True for every element in the iterable" > return False not in imap(pred, seq) > > def some(pred, seq): > "Returns True if pred(x) is True at least one element in the iterable" > return True in imap(pred, seq) > > def no(pred, seq): > "Returns True if pred(x) is False for every element in the iterable" > return True not in imap(pred, seq) I would instead call some "any" (it's more standard among the functional languages I've worked with), and I wouldn't bother with "no," since it's exactly the same as "not any" (or "not some," as the case may be). As Raymond Hettinger already mentioned, obviously such predicates over sequences should exhibit short-circuit behavior -- any should return with the first True response and all should return with the first False response. Jeremy
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