[Python-ideas] Re: default as a keyword argument for dict.get and dict.pop
On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 at 00:36, wrote: > > Hello! > > Do you know if there has been discussions around why is the default argument > is positional only in the dict methods get and pop? > > I think > > ``` > d.get(key, default=3) > ``` > > way more readable than > > ``` > d.get(key, 3) > ``` > > specially since max and min builtin functions use default as a keyword > argument. With min and max, it MUST be a keyword argument, because positional arguments are the values to be compared. So I think the main reason is "because nobody ever bothered to do it". If there's enough value in it, that could probably be changed, although mere consistency alone isn't a very strong argument. ChrisA ___ 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/26RTH4UI7B26DMWP6LSIK4VIAV7NCIQT/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] Re: default as a keyword argument for dict.get and dict.pop
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 02:28:51PM -, martineznicolas41...@gmail.com wrote: > Do you know if there has been discussions around why is the default > argument is positional only in the dict methods get and pop? Its probably just left over from earlier versions of Python when builtin functions only used positional arguments. Positional arguments are a little faster than keyword arguments, and especially for builtin functions, easier to program. You could try making an enhancement request on the bug tracker and see if any one is willing to do the work. -- Steve ___ 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/XX5IGYNZHBGVBWTKDAYRV7IH7P44TLDB/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] default as a keyword argument for dict.get and dict.pop
Hello! Do you know if there has been discussions around why is the default argument is positional only in the dict methods get and pop? I think ``` d.get(key, default=3) ``` way more readable than ``` d.get(key, 3) ``` specially since max and min builtin functions use default as a keyword argument. ___ 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/IFM3QL67EWQCROPIX3DNCR44F4ULMFD3/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] Re: Addition to fnmatch.py
On 2022-06-07 11:03, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 19:09, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote: This calls the predicate once per element: def partition(pred, iterable): t1, t2 = tee((pred(x), x) for x in iterable) return (x for b, x in t1 if not b), (x for b, x in t2 if b) It's kind of inefficient though. Honestly, if it weren't that there's currently a recipe in itertools, I think the list-based version would be the best recipe to offer. The cost of doing the job lazily AND maintaining all the other expectations is too high; if you really need it to be lazy, it's probably worth seeing if one of the other demands can be relaxed (eg if it's fine to call the predicate twice). For the OP's task, doing the partitioning eagerly wouldn't be an issue. The problem with a lazy solution is that if you're producing 2 streams of output, as it were, and if you're consuming from only one of them, what are you going to do about the other one? You still need to store the items for it in case you want to consume them later, and if the original iterable is infinite, you have a problem... ___ 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/T3JM5DZSN55OEWINS2HYJAZJLOKLJWPJ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] Re: Addition to fnmatch.py
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 19:09, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote: > > This calls the predicate once per element: > > def partition(pred, iterable): > t1, t2 = tee((pred(x), x) for x in iterable) > return (x for b, x in t1 if not b), (x for b, x in t2 if b) > > It's kind of inefficient though. Honestly, if it weren't that there's currently a recipe in itertools, I think the list-based version would be the best recipe to offer. The cost of doing the job lazily AND maintaining all the other expectations is too high; if you really need it to be lazy, it's probably worth seeing if one of the other demands can be relaxed (eg if it's fine to call the predicate twice). For the OP's task, doing the partitioning eagerly wouldn't be an issue. ChrisA ___ 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/JA7C3XAP4H53VJBI2QR56XDJA2GQJN3W/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-ideas] Re: Addition to fnmatch.py
This calls the predicate once per element: def partition(pred, iterable): t1, t2 = tee((pred(x), x) for x in iterable) return (x for b, x in t1 if not b), (x for b, x in t2 if b) It's kind of inefficient though. ___ 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/DQBFYD7KYRG6OOMXIY7IH45S25U6SXTK/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
