Steven:
You've misunderstood part of the discussion. There are two different
signatures being discussed/proposed for a grouping() function.
The one you show we might call grouping_michael(). The alternate API we
might call grouping_chris(). These two calls will produce the same result
(the first output you show)
grouping_michael(words, keyfunc=len)
grouping_chris((len(word), word) for word in words)
I happen to prefer grouping_michael(), but recognize they each make
slightly different things obvious. Absolutely no one wants the behavior in
your second output.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 9:32 PM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Of course you can prepare the sequence any way you like, but these are
> not equivalent:
>
> grouping(words, keyfunc=len)
> grouping((len(word), word) for word in words)
>
> The first groups words by their length; the second groups pairs of
> (length, word) tuples by equality.
>
> py> grouping("a bb ccc d ee fff".split(), keyfunc=len)
> {1: ['a', 'd'], 2: ['bb', 'ee'], 3: ['ccc', 'fff']}
>
> py> grouping((len(w), w) for w in "a bb ccc d ee fff".split())
> {(3, 'ccc'): [(3, 'ccc')], (1, 'd'): [(1, 'd')], (2, 'ee'): [(2, 'ee')],
> (3, 'fff'): [(3, 'fff')], (1, 'a'): [(1, 'a')], (2, 'bb'): [(2, '
>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
