Roose wrote:
Yeah, as we can see there are a million ways to do it. But none of them are
as desirable as just having a library function to do the same thing. I'd
argue that since there are so many different ways, we should just collapse
them into one: any() and all(). That is more in keeping with the python
philosophy I suppose -- having one canonical way to do things. Otherwise
you could see any of these several ways of doing it in any program, and each
time you have to make sure it's doing what you think. Each of them requies
more examination than is justified for such a trivial operation. And this
definitely hurts the readability of the program.
Previous discussion on this topic:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/a76b4c2caf6c435c
Michael
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
