What about an EXPLICIT naming scheme for built-ins?

[Carlos Ribeiro]

On 8 Sep 2004 19:10:42 -0700, Raymond Hettinger <python at rcn.com> wrote:
> Carlos Ribeiro <carribeiro at gmail.com> wrote in message news:<mailman.2838.1094223946.5135.python-list at python.org>...
> All of the needs you describe are adequately met by heaps which
> provide just-in-time sorting.

Actually, I have pointed out somewhere in the middle of my message
that a heap would probably be a good solution to it. I wasn't aware
that the new heap library was written in C< though. But even this had
left us with the problem on how to write the itersort generator as a
cookbook solution. Yours seems to fit the bill  :-)
 
> With all the real needs having been met, this thread can now return to
> naming debates which can be joyfully fought in perpetuity without
> resolution.

I'm actually having a lot of fun with this thread, I was out of Python
talk for a long time, and discussing this topic helped a lot to get me
up to date with a number of recent enhancements. As for the naming
fight, well, I still think that the naming could be improved,  but as
you said, that's a perpetual fight and nobody seems to be willing to
accept defeat :-)

p.s. If you haven't read the full thread, please do it -- there is an
interesting debate on the idiom to generate a list out of reversed(),
and why many people choose list comprehensions to do it even if the
solution is more verbose and slower than using list().

-- 
Carlos Ribeiro
Consultoria em Projetos
blog: http://rascunhosrotos.blogspot.com
blog: http://pythonnotes.blogspot.com
mail: carribeiro at gmail.com
mail: carribeiro at yahoo.com