On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 8:55 PM Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue., 2 Jun. 2020, 11:23 am Steven D'Aprano, <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: >> >> >> >> > The conceptual idea here is that the "truncate" flag name would technically >> > be a shorter mnemonic for "truncate_silently", so clearing it gives you an >> > exception rather enabling padding behaviour. >> > >> > Flipping the sense of the flag also means that "truncate=True" will appear >> > in IDE tooltips as part of the function signature, providing significantly >> > more information than "strict=False" would. >> >> "Significantly" more? I don't think so. >> >> Truncate at what? >> >> - some maximum length; >> - some specific element; >> - at the shortest input. > > > Given that the only input parameters are the iterables themselves, it's a > stretch to even consider the first two as possibilities. >
Why? I can conceivably imagine that zip(iter1, iter2, truncate=5) would consume at most 5 elements from each iterable. It's not much of a stretch. It doesn't happen to be what's proposed, but it's a reasonable interpretation. (Though then the default would probably be truncate=None to not truncate.) ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/7VDR7U53YPC5XPELHQ5TGZCJ74VIQ7KB/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
