Julien,
Personally, I would be able to use the module you are proposing to
accumulate arbitrarily-named measures. I can not think of a use case for
division, but it would be nice for completion. I have made my own
library that implements a small part of what you propose [1].
I was looking
And with libraries like pip install funcoperators or pip install infix, you
can even write it infix :D
from funcoperators import infix
@infix
def superop(d1, sc):
return {k: (v *superopp* sc) for k, v in d1.items()}
print({'a': 8} *superop* 5)
Le mer. 31 oct. 2018 à 18:35, Vladimir
Julien, would I be correct if I summarized the changes you have in
mind like this:
for dictionaries d1 and d2,
non-Mapping ("scalar") sc,
binary operation ⊛,
and unary operation 퓊 (such as negation or abs()):
d1 ⊛ sc == {k: (v ⊛ sc) for k, v in d1.items()}
sc ⊛ d1 == {k: (sc ⊛ v) for k, v in
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 00:20, David Mertz wrote:
> Counter doesn't QUITE do the same thing as this `mdict`. But it's pretty
> close.
>
> I think if .__add__() became a synonym for .update() that wouldn't break
> anything that currently works. But I'm probably wrong, and missing a case
> in my
Actually, they are definitely different as in-place mutation versus
returning a new Counter. But in some arithmetic way they look mostly the
same.
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 7:19 PM David Mertz Counter doesn't QUITE do the same thing as this `mdict`. But it's pretty
> close.
>
> I think if
Counter doesn't QUITE do the same thing as this `mdict`. But it's pretty
close.
I think if .__add__() became a synonym for .update() that wouldn't break
anything that currently works. But I'm probably wrong, and missing a case
in my quick thought:
>>> from collections import Counter
>>> c =
> In [12]: a= mdict(a=[2], b='a')
> In [13]: a+a
Aren't you reinventing the Counter type?
>>> from collections import Counter
>>> c = Counter(a=1,b=2)
>>> c + c
Counter({'b': 4, 'a': 2})
___
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 at 22:33, Greg Ewing
wrote:
> julien tayon wrote:
> > like the + of [] could be the + of "RecordAlgebrae"
>
> If you're proposing to change the behaviour of '+' on the
> built-in list type, that's not going to happen.
>
> I dont suggest to change something that already exists
julien tayon wrote:
like the + of [] could be the + of "RecordAlgebrae"
If you're proposing to change the behaviour of '+' on the
built-in list type, that's not going to happen.
--
Greg
___
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
Thanks robert for the praise. It feels nice.
I may be bold, but I really hate to come empty handed to a discussion. So
this lib is nothing more than doing my homework when I don't have a PhD.
Actually, science (in my opinion) is about measuring. What I propose is
nothing more than (if you add
Julien, your article is very pleasant to read (and funny) but as other say
the mailing list is not there to share some articles, but for proposition
to the standard python library,
do our own lib on github and pypi first if you want to Share some code to
the world !
And if project becomes super
> What are your opinions ?
> I don't actually see a lot of use case except it was funny to build. But
> maybe it can be of use.
This list is for suggesting additions and changes to python. Broad usefulness
is a prerequisite. So please build your lib but this seems off topic on this
list.
/
12 matches
Mail list logo
