On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM, eat <e.antero.ta...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> In a recent thread >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/52772 it was >> proposed that .fill(.) should return self as an alternative for a trivial >> two-liner. >> >> I'm raising now the question: what if all in-place operations indeed could >> return self? How bad this would be? A 'strong' counter argument may be found >> at http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/038855.html. >> >> But anyway, at least for me. it would be much more straightforward to >> implement simple mini dsl's >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_language) a much more >> straightforward manner. >> >> What do you think? >> > > I've read Guido about why he didn't like inplace operations returning self > and found him convincing for a while. And then I listened to other folks > express a preference for the freight train style and found them convincing > also. I think it comes down to a preference for one style over another and I > go back and forth myself. If I had to vote, I'd go for returning self, but > I'm not sure it's worth breaking python conventions to do so. > > Chuck
I'm -1 on breaking with Python convention without very good reasons. Ray _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
