On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 19:19, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Yeah, I don't think that'll work if you slice more than once,
> especially with some iteration in between.
I think part of the point of this implementation [or the other person's
suggestion of having a "collection view", which amounts to
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:48 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
> If enumerate(some_sequence) returns a sequence view, iterating over
> that sequence view does not advance it—just like how DictViews are not
> altered by iteration. Same thing if reversed(some_sequence) returns a
> sequence view.
Then
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:19 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:10 AM Random832 wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 18:48, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > Note that slicing is NOT easy. The proposed semantics for a reversed
> > > enumeration would make slicing extremely odd.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:10 AM Random832 wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 18:48, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Note that slicing is NOT easy. The proposed semantics for a reversed
> > enumeration would make slicing extremely odd.
>
> What proposed semantics? You were the one who posted a
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 18:48, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Note that slicing is NOT easy. The proposed semantics for a reversed
> enumeration would make slicing extremely odd.
What proposed semantics? You were the one who posted a pure-python
implementation that didn't bother to implement slicing.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 8:31 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
> It's possible for reversed(enumerate(...)) to just work if enumerate
> of a sequence were to return a sequence view. Then you would also get
> all the other sequence operations for free like enumerate(...)[23:27],
> len(enumerate(...)), etc.
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:13 PM Christopher Barker wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:43 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
>>
>> > > I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some
>> > > iterator transformations (like enumerate) should return sequences when
>> > > they're applied
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:43 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
> > > I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some
> iterator transformations (like enumerate) should return sequences when
> they're applied to sequences.
I'm not so sure -- I don't think I want a sequence returned.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:44 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:21 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
> > >
> > > I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some
> > > iterator transformations (like
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:21 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
> >
> > I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some
> > iterator transformations (like enumerate) should return sequences when
> > they're applied to sequences.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 5:21 AM Neil Girdhar wrote:
>
> I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some iterator
> transformations (like enumerate) should return sequences when they're applied
> to sequences. I think it's good idea, but it adds complexity and work, which
>
I've seen this proposed here before. The general idea is that some
iterator transformations (like enumerate) should return sequences when
they're applied to sequences. I think it's good idea, but it adds
complexity and work, which I guess needs to be justified on a case-by-case
basis.
In
So, what is the conclusion? I also think reversed(enumerate(some_seq)) will be
very useful in many cases.
It should:
1) work the same as reversed(tuple(enumerate(...))) for "reversible" objects as
argument of enumerate,
2) raise TypeError if the object is not reversible.
Or, another option
13 matches
Mail list logo
