On 08.06.16 02:03, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> That said, it occurs to me that there's a reasonably strong
> composability argument in favour of a view-based approach: a view will
> work with operator.itemgetter() and other sequence consuming APIs,
> while special methods won't. The "like-memoryview-but-not" view type
> could also take any bytes-like object as input, similar to memoryview
> itself.
Something like:
class chunks:
def __init__(self, seq, size):
self._seq = seq
self._size = size
def __len__(self):
return len(self._seq) // self._size
def __getitem__(self, i):
chunk = self._seq[i: i + self._size]
if len(chunk) != self._size:
raise IndexError
return chunk
(but needs more checks and slices support).
It would be useful for general sequences too.
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