Re: What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?
From: Marco Aschwanden (PPNTWIMBXFFC_at_spammotel.com)
Date: 09/03/04
- Next message: Christopher Browne: "Re: Xah Lee's Unixism"
- Previous message: Peter Hansen: "Re: namespace question"
- Maybe in reply to: Marco Aschwanden: "What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?"
- Next in thread: Jp Calderone: "Re: What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: python-list@python.org Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 15:43:33 +0200
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 10:33:29 -0300, Carlos Ribeiro <carribeiro@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I propose a slightly different approach. First, proposing a generic
> naming scheme for built-ins is an ambitious goal, to say the least.
Agreed.
> 1) sorted() and reversed() should return sequences.
>
> 2) add two new builtins, called respectively xsorted() and
> xreversed(), as the iterator versions of sorted() and reversed(). This
> way we keep the existing naming convention for range() and xrange().
That is a good idea and does not introduce a new naming scheme. Good.
Cheers,
Marco
- Next message: Christopher Browne: "Re: Xah Lee's Unixism"
- Previous message: Peter Hansen: "Re: namespace question"
- Maybe in reply to: Marco Aschwanden: "What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?"
- Next in thread: Jp Calderone: "Re: What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]