On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 21:40:12 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 06:50:29PM +0000, Dan Sommers wrote: >> On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 03:44:07 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 12:11:40PM -0500, Abe Dillon wrote: >> >> > difflib tests include this call: >> > >> > sm = difflib.SequenceMatcher(isjunk=lambda x: x == ' ', ...) > [...] > >> When you talk about intent, I think about use cases. In the difflib >> code I quoted above, is the intent to define a function, or to >> instantiate a SequenceMatcher? Well, no, it's probably to compute some >> sort of difference. Instatiating a SequenceMatcher and defining isjunk >> are details. >> >> So you're both wrong. :-P >> >> Or you're both right. :-/ > > In this case, "intent" could refer to (for example): > > Should we accuse Fred Bloggs of plagarism or not? > +- decide whether two documents came from the same source; > +- decide whether the diff between two text strings falls > within some threshold; > +- initiate and use a SequenceMatcher object; > +- provide an isjunk predicate function; > +- implement a specific predicate function. > > > Because we are talking about lambda syntax specifically, I didn't think > the higher hierachies of intent were relevant, so I didn't mention them. > I thought we could focus on the two relevant to the syntax we're > discussing: > > Provide an isjunk predicate function; > +- implement a specific predicate function. > > and take the higher levels as given. Given those two levels, "Provide a > predicate function" is at a higher level than the implementation of that > predicate function. > > I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.
Yes, the discussion is/was about lambda syntax, and about how quickly I (or someone else) can recognize that isjunk is being defined as an anonymous function. Perhaps I missed that the larger context had already been established. To focus my argument within your clarification: if I have all of that context, then I don't have to parse the code to know that the isjunk parameter is a function. And if parsing the anonymous function gives you (the generic you) that much trouble, then please break it out into a def statement instead. Flat is better than nested. IIRC, you push for named functions in all but the most trivial cases anyway (and I tend to agree). Dan _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
