reduce()--what is it good for? (was: Re: reduce() anomaly?)
Douglas Alan
nessus at mit.edu
Sat Nov 8 02:21:29 EST 2003
Alex Martelli <aleaxit at yahoo.com> writes:
> Existing, builtin functions _will_ be removed in 3.0: Guido is on record
> as stating that (at both Europython and OSCON -- I don't recall if he
> had already matured that determination at PythonUK time). They
> exist for a reason, but when that reason is: "once upon a time, we
> thought (perhaps correctly, given the way the rest of the language and
> library was at the time) that they were worth having", that's not
> sufficient reason to weigh down the language forever with their
> not-useful-enough weight. The alternatives to removing those parts that
> aren't useful enough any more are, either to stop Python's development
> forever, or to make Python _bloated_ with several ways to perform the
> same tasks.
I agree: Down with bloat! Get rid of sum() -- it's redundant with
reduce(), which I use all the time, like so:
def longer(x, y):
if len(y) > len(x): return y
else: return x
def longest(seq):
return reduce(longer, seq)
print longest(("abc", "yumyum!", "hello", "goodbye", "?"))
=> yumyum!
|>oug
More information about the Python-list
mailing list