zip or marry etc

[Michael Hudson]

Robin Becker <robin at jessikat.fsnet.co.uk> writes:

> I suppose there must be something desperately wrong with using the
> __mul__ for sequences to indicate the set pairwise product. I would
> certainly be for
> 
> x,y in A*B rather than x,y in zip(A,B) or marry(A,B), but since * is the
> obvious operator it must be that someone else has reserved it.

Well, whatever "zip" ends up being called, it doesn't return the
Cartesian product of the set of elements of the list, so using the
product operator would be, at best, confusing!

Wouldn't you expect

>>> for i,j in [0,1]*[2,3]:
...     print i,j
(0,2)
(0,3)
(1,2)
(1,3)

rather than 

>>> for i,j in zip([0,1],[2,3]):
...     print i,j
(0,2)
(1,3)

?

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  I also fondly recall Paris because that's where I learned to
  debug Zetalisp while drunk.                          -- Olin Shivers