> > Shouldn't "reduce" stay in the 'built-in' space, while the other two > > move to "functools"? Or move them all to "functools"? Bizarre > > recombination, IMO. > > Arguing from the standpoint of purity, that, "these functions are > builtins, why not this other one" isn't going to get you very far.
If you think that's what I was arguing, you'd better re-read that message. Though, from the standpoint of pragmatism, removing "reduce" from the built-in space will break code (*my* code, among others), and leaving it in will not affect "purity", as both "map" and "reduce" are being left in. So leaving it alone seems the more Pythonic response to me. Guido's argument (http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196) is that "any" and "all" (and "filter", of course) are better ways to do the same thing. I'm not sure, but it's an interesting hypothesis. But while we run the experiment, why not leave "reduce" where it is? Bill _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
