Steven D'Aprano writes: > And yet it is indisputable that chained methods are useful even for > methods which modify the object they work on. Look at pandas:
Guido disputed that it was useful *enough*. My point was advice to the proponent to get his proposal adopted (despite the fact that I personall think it's a YAGNI), not a characterization of universal best practice. > > 2. Is the method chaining syntax preferable to an alternative > > operator? > > What do you mean, a different operator? Are you suggesting we should > have two operators for method lookups? No, I'm suggesting that pipelines could have an alternative syntax using a different operator. This probably isn't really feasible since (unless we actually added syntax) it would require some sort of contortion or additional boilerplate to handle non-iterator arguments. > a. is obviously impossible, since strings already support method > chaining, The OP wasn't talking about general method chaining, and neither was I. _______________________________________________ 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/7LEYEJLRQFVGRXS46TQOIVSYKXO2Y4Z7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
