I are the appeal, but this really seems too special purpose for yet another
dunder. A SortedList might be a good addition to the statistics package,
however.
I note that with regard to sorting, I suggested a __sort_key dunder so that
the sorting routines could know how to efficiently sort
It surely would be helpful. I still find it a bit too single-case oriented.
Maybe having an equivalent __sorting_algo__ property with a value of the
current sorting algorithm would be more general?
There could be a SortingAlgo base class, which could be extended into
classes like:
-
On 4/8/2019 4:48 PM, Barry Scott wrote:
On 8 Apr 2019, at 19:37, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 4/8/2019 5:40 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 07:44:41AM +0100, Alex Chamberlain wrote:
I think a better abstraction for a sorted list is a new class, which
implements the Sequence
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 22:07, Barry Scott wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 8 Apr 2019, at 19:37, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >
> > On 4/8/2019 5:40 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 07:44:41AM +0100, Alex Chamberlain wrote:
> >>> I think a better abstraction for a sorted list is a new class,
> On 8 Apr 2019, at 19:37, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> On 4/8/2019 5:40 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 07:44:41AM +0100, Alex Chamberlain wrote:
>>> I think a better abstraction for a sorted list is a new class, which
>>> implements the Sequence protocol (and hence can be
On 4/8/2019 5:40 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 07:44:41AM +0100, Alex Chamberlain wrote:
I think a better abstraction for a sorted list is a new class, which
implements the Sequence protocol (and hence can be used in a lot of
existing list contexts), but only exposed
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 6:26 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Given all the points already raised, I think that an explicit SortedList
> might be more appropriate.
>
This one looks cool. I've read about it, but haven't used it:
http://www.grantjenks.com/docs/sortedcontainers/
I think a "sort hint"
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 5:46 AM Paul Moore wrote:
> Still not convinced this is safe enough to be worth it ;-)
>
I'm convinced it's NOT safe enough to be worth it.
On the other hand, a sortedlist subclass that maintained its invariant
(probably remembering a key) sounds cool. I think there are
On 4/8/19 6:25 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 02:55:54AM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> If only we had some kind of API that could compute multiple quantiles at
>> the same time...
>
> You mean something like this?
>
> quartiles, quintiles, deciles, percentiles =
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 11:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> Fair enough, but does it help you feel a bit better about the feature if
> we called it a "sort hint", and emphasized that it should only be used
> in the same sort of APIs where you might allow the caller to pass
>
> already_sorted=True
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:34:19AM +0100, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 10:10, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> > Possibly the maintainer of bisect may decide that its not worth the
> > change. But for the statistics module, I would certainly change the
> > implementation of median() to
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 02:55:54AM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Right, by "doesn't affect" I meant "cannot get any benefit, even if their
> code is modified".
Ah, sorry I misunderstood you.
> > # This only makes sense if data is a sequence (list)
> > # not an iterator.
> >
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 02:09 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 08:26:24PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 7:37 PM Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
> > > There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
> > > sorted. For example, the bisect
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 10:34, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> The median (and soon, quantiles) API says:
>
> I'm going to sort the list for you, whether you need it or
> not, just in case you do.
Hmm, I didn't see that mentioned in the docs. It makes a difference to
my comment about behaviour
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 07:44:41AM +0100, Alex Chamberlain wrote:
> I think a better abstraction for a sorted list is a new class, which
> implements the Sequence protocol (and hence can be used in a lot of
> existing list contexts), but only exposed mutation methods that can
> guarantee that
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 10:10, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Possibly the maintainer of bisect may decide that its not worth the
> change. But for the statistics module, I would certainly change the
> implementation of median() to look something vaguely like this:
>
> # was
> data =
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 03:18:53PM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> If this is a publicly queriable value, is there any need to have a
> dunder name at all? Why not just give lists a public is_sorted
> attribute?
I don't mind that.
> I'm also not convinced the cost to every insert/append is
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 01:31:14PM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> __setitem__ concerns me, along with other modification methods: what
> about subclasses(*)? Every existing subclass which overrides __setitem__
> now needs to grow code to maintain __issorted__ if they do not
> themselves call
On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 08:26:24PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 7:37 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
> > sorted. For example, the bisect module, and for statistics median and
> > other quantiles.
>
> But
looks for me that means that all subclass of list has to maintain the
__isorted__ invariant,
looks like not a backward compatible modification and quite problematic
in case of the invariant broken.
So if I'm correct the design is brittle.
Moreover, that solve only the strict subset of sort case
Basically, I like this idea and of course theoretically it has use cases. But
in the proposed form, it feels strongly curtailed. In practice, what does
it mean to be sorted?
[('a', 1),('b', 2),('bb', 4),('aaa', 3)] # Is this list sorted?
[('a', 1),('aaa', 3),('b', 2),('bb', 4)] # or this?
On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 at 06:19, Cameron Simpson wrote:
>
> On 08Apr2019 00:17, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >On 4/7/2019 10:32 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >>There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
> >>sorted. [...]
> >>Proposal: let's give lists a dunder flag, __issorted__,
On 08Apr2019 00:17, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 4/7/2019 10:32 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
sorted. [...]
Proposal: let's give lists a dunder flag, __issorted__, that tracks
whether the list is definitely sorted or not:
[...]
On 4/7/2019 10:32 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
sorted. For example, the bisect module, and for statistics median and
other quantiles.
Sorting a list is potentially expensive: while Timsort is very
efficient, it is still
On 08Apr2019 12:32, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
sorted. For example, the bisect module, and for statistics median and
other quantiles.
Sorting a list is potentially expensive: while Timsort is very
efficient, it is still
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 7:37 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> There are quite a few important algorithms which require lists to be
> sorted. For example, the bisect module, and for statistics median and
> other quantiles.
But this flag doesn't affect those modules, right? 'bisect' already
requires the
26 matches
Mail list logo
