> On May 6, 2018, at 6:00 AM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 04:32:09PM +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> Maybe I'm slow today, but I'm having trouble seeing how to write this as
>> a lambda.
>
> Yes, I was definitely having a "cannot brain, I have the dumb" day,
> because it is not that hard to write using lambda. See discussion here:
>
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2018-May/732795.html
>
> If anything, the problem is a plethora of choices, where it isn't clear
> which if any is the best way, or the One Obvious Way
At one time, lambda was the one obvious way. Later, partial, itemgetter,
attrgetter, and methodcaller were added to express common patterns for
key-functions and map(). If needed, the zoo of lambda alternatives could be
further extended to add a rpartial() function that partials from the right.
That would have helped with Miki's example. Instead of:
get = attrgetter('foo', None)
return get(args) or get(config) or get(env)
He could've written:
get = rpartial(getattr, 'foo', None)
return get(args) or get(config) or get(env)
If itemgetter and attrgetter only did a single lookup, a default might make
sense. However, that doesn't fit well with multiple and/or chained lookups
where are number of options are possible. (See
https://bugs.python.org/issue14384#msg316222 for examples and alternatives).
Raymond
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
