Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #46582 > unrolled thread

Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2013-05-31 09:08 +0000
    Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Fábio Santos <fabiosantosart@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 11:16 +0100
    Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 03:27 -0700
      Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2013-05-31 11:52 +0000
    Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 09:39 -0600

#46582 — Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?

On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:38:40 +0100, MRAB wrote:

> On 30/05/2013 19:44, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:49 PM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On May 30, 6:14 am, Ma Xiaojun <damage3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What interest me is a one liner:
>>>>> print '\n'.join(['\t'.join(['%d*%d=%d' % (j,i,i*j) for i in
>>>>> range(1,10)]) for j in range(1,10)])
>>>>
>>>> Ha,Ha! The join method is one of the (for me) ugly features of
>>>> python.
>>>> You can sweep it under the carpet with a one-line join function and
>>>> then write clean and pretty code:
>>>>
>>>> #joinwith def joinw(l,sep): return sep.join(l)
>>>
>>> I don't object to changing the join method (one of the more
>>> shoe-horned string methods) back into a function, but to my eyes
>>> you've got the arguments backward.  It should be:
>>>
>>> def join(sep, iterable): return sep.join(iterable)
>>
>> Trouble is, it makes some sense either way. I often put the larger
>> argument first - for instance, I would write 123412341324*5 rather than
>> the other way around - and in this instance, it hardly seems as
>> clear-cut as you imply. But the function can't be written to take them
>> in either order, because strings are iterable too. (And functions that
>> take args either way around aren't better than those that make a
>> decision.)
>>
> And additional argument (pun not intended) for putting sep second is
> that you can give it a default value:
> 
>     def join(iterable, sep=""): return sep.join(iterable)

I think that is the winning argument.
Next question is what should be the default ("", " " or',')?



-- 
Nasrudin walked into a teahouse and declaimed, "The moon is more useful
than the sun."
	"Why?", he was asked.
	"Because at night we need the light more."

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#46591

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I think that is the winning argument.
> Next question is what should be the default ("", " " or',')?

join, comma_join, whitejoin, linejoin variants, with different defaults?

--
Fábio Santos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46592

On May 31, 2:08 pm, Alister <alister.w...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:38:40 +0100, MRAB wrote:
> > And additional argument (pun not intended) for putting sep second is
> > that you can give it a default value:
>
> >     def join(iterable, sep=""): return sep.join(iterable)
>
> I think that is the winning argument.

Yes

> Next question is what should be the default ("", " " or',')?

Hmm... Never thought there was any choice here except "".  Yes can see
the case for each.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46598

On Fri, 31 May 2013 03:27:52 -0700, rusi wrote:

> On May 31, 2:08 pm, Alister <alister.w...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:38:40 +0100, MRAB wrote:
>> > And additional argument (pun not intended) for putting sep second is
>> > that you can give it a default value:
>>
>> >     def join(iterable, sep=""): return sep.join(iterable)
>>
>> I think that is the winning argument.
> 
> Yes
> 
>> Next question is what should be the default ("", " " or',')?
> 
> Hmm... Never thought there was any choice here except "".  Yes can see
> the case for each.

to be fair "" is probably the most sensible although in my programs most 
joins are using ','



-- 
We are governed not by armies and police but by ideas.
		-- Mona Caird, 1892

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#46610

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Fábio Santos <fabiosantosart@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> I think that is the winning argument.
>> Next question is what should be the default ("", " " or',')?
>
> join, comma_join, whitejoin, linejoin variants, with different defaults?

The more specific versions should not even have the parameter as an
argument that can be supplied.  Otherwise you could do:

comma_join(words, sep=';')

which is just unclear, and there is no reason to allow it.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web