Steven D'Aprano skrev: > On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 23:53:15 -0400, David Abrahams wrote: > >> on Wed Jul 04 2007, "Steven D'Aprano" >> <steve-AT-REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:37:34 +0000, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:59:24 -0400, David Abrahams wrote: >>>> >>>>> Here's an implementation of the functionality I propose, as a >>>>> free-standing function: >>>>> >>>>> def intersects(s1,s2): >>>>> if len(s1) < len(s2): >>>>> for x in s1: >>>>> if x in s2: return True >>>>> else: >>>>> for x in s2: >>>>> if x in s1 return True >>>>> return False >>>> In Python 2.5 this can be written a bit more concise: >>>> >>>> def intersects(set_a, set_b): >>>> if len(set_a) < len(set_b): >>>> set_a, set_b = set_b, set_a >>>> return any(item in set_a for item in set_b) >>> >>> I'd rather see sets gain an method "isintersect()" >> And why is that a good name? It's not even grammatical. > > Neither is "It's not even grammatical", but all but purists use it > regardless. > > A common Python convention is to have test functions named something > like "isfoo", e.g. str.isdigit(), isspace(), islower() etc. They're not > exactly grammatical either, e.g. isdigit() should actually be "contains > one or more digits, and nothing but digits". (Presumably the pedantically > correct name was rejected as being too long.) I was just following that > convention.
The problem is, these functions can be read as "X is [consisting only of] digit[s]", "X is lower [case]" etc, where the bits in brackets have been removed for brewity. In the case of "s1 is intersect s2" there is no way I can see of adding words to get a correct sentence. The "obvious" naming is "s1.intersects(s2)" which reads as "s1 intersects s2", a perfectly cromulent sentence. Nis -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
