E. Madison Bray wrote:
I still believe
that the actual proposal of making the arguments to a map(...) call
accessible from Python as attributes of the map object (ditto filter,
zip, etc.) is useful in its own right, rather than just having this
completely opaque iterator.
But it will only help if the user passes a map object in particular,
and not some other kind of iterator. Also it won't help if the
inputs to the map are themselves iterators that aren't amenable to
inspection. This smells like exposing an implementation detail of your
function in its API.
I don't see how it would help with your Sage port either, since
the original code only got the result of the mapping and wouldn't
have been able to inspect the underlying iterables.
I wonder whether it's too late to redefine map() so that it returns
a view object instead of an iterator, as was done when merging
dict.{items, iter_items} etc.
Alternatively, add a mapped() bultin that returns a view.
--
Greg
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
