On 1/15/2014 9:25 PM, Vajrasky Kok wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
>>>> from itertools import repeat
>>>> list(repeat('a', 3))
> ['a', 'a', 'a']
>>>> list(repeat('a', 0))
> []
>>>> repeat.__doc__
> 'repeat(object [,times]) -> create an iterator which returns the
> object\nfor the specified number of times. If not specified, returns
> the object\nendlessly.'
I think that the doc should say that a negative value is treated as 0
and that this is enough for a tracker issue after you get more feedback
or gather more info. There is at least one other builtin/stdlib function
that does this.
> If you omit the times argument:
>
>>>> list(repeat('a'))
> ... unlimited of a .... sometimes it can hang your machine ....
>
> In the C code it self, the default value of variable handling times
> argument is -1.
Is is necessary to give times a pseudo-default? What is done in other
places (which are many) where a parameter is optional, with no default?
> It checks how many arguments you give to the function.
> So if you give -1 directly:
>
>>>> list(repeat('a', -1))
> []
>
> Negative value of times argument means 0.
>
> So what is the correct signature of this function? The value is not
> really capturable in Python and C.
The signature in the doc is correct: times is optional, with no default
value. Instead, the function has a default behavior that does not need
the value. There are other examples. The (nearly) 'equivalent' Python
code in the doc fakes this with times=None, but passing None fails. I
think the same issue occurs in the random module.
> repeat(object [,times = unlimited]) ????
>
> Can we do this in Clinic? If not, should we?
I should hope that Clinic (and signature objects) can handle no-default
optional args, as there are several.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
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