On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 5:11 PM Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
> On 05/08/2020 07:50 AM, Alex Hall wrote: > > On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 4:46 PM Henk-Jaap Wagenaar wrote: > >> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 14:16, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info > <mailto:st...@pearwood.info>> wrote: > >> > >>> If you have ever written something like any of these: > >>> > >>> all(x==y for x,y in zip(a, b)) > >> > >> That looks like a zip call that could do with checking its input or > strict=True! > > > > Steven mentioned that originally: > >> > >> (Aside: if we go down this track, this could be a justification for > >> zip_strict to be a builtin; see the current thread(s) on having a > >> version of zip which strictly requires its input to be equal length.) > > > > But since you probably want these expressions to evaluate to false > rather than raise an exception when the lengths are different, a strict zip > is not appropriate. > > But if: > > short_sequence == long_sequence[:len(short_sequence)] > > then you'll get True. > So you'd need to just check the lengths first. That was in Steven's older code snippet, which I tried to quote and shows in my sent messages but not now. Really hating this email quoting.
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/MSTSV76SAASQDW65JPXOUNJP7X6QLJZG/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
