Andrew Bennetts wrote: > A patch to add operator.caller(*args, **kwargs) may be a good idea. Your > example would then be: > > map(operator.caller(), lst) Regarding the name, note that I proposed operator.call (and operator.__call__) because it corresponds to the __call__ special method, which is analogous to how operator.neg corresponds to __neg__, operator.add to __add__, etc. The term "caller" implies creation of a new object that carries additional state, such as method name in operator.methodcaller, item in operator.itemgetter, or attr in operator.attrgetter.
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