Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Raymond Hettinger <python <at> rcn.com> writes: >> IMO, its only virtue is that people coming from functional languages >> are used to having compose. Otherwise, it's a YAGNI. > > Then I wonder how partial() ended up in the stdlib. It seems hardly more > useful than compose().
I would certainly consider it more useful, but that aside, it's also a lot simpler to understand and use than the proposed compose() function. I think the main difference is that compose() requires functional/math skills to be used and read correctly (and might still be surprising in some corner cases), whereas partial() only requires you to understand how to set a function argument. Totally different level of mental complexity, IMHO. Stefan _______________________________________________ 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
