On Fri, 3 Feb 2006 07:00:26 -0800, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Feb 3, 2006, at 6:47 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > ... >> use itemgetter and friends but the "correct" way of doing a >> defferred "x[1]" >> *should* let you write "x[1]" in the code. This is my main >> opposition to >> partial/itemgetter/attrgetter/methodcaller: they allow deferred >> execution >> using a syntax which is not equivalent to that of immediate execution. > >I understand your worry re the syntax issue. So what about Michael >Hudson's "placeholder class" idea, where X[1] returns the callable >that will do x[1] when called, etc? Looks elegant to me... >
FWIW, <http://cvs.twistedmatrix.com/cvs/sandbox/glyph/eacher.py?view=markup&rev=12804> <http://cvs.twistedmatrix.com/cvs/sandbox/cake.py?view=markup&rev=12804> Jean-Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
