[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Feb 2, 12:13 pm, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> 1. functools.partialpre: partialpre( f, x, y )( z )-> f( z, x, y ) >>> 2. functools.pare: pare( f, 1 )( x, y )-> f( y ) >>> 3. functools.parepre: parepre( f, 1 )( x, y )-> f( x ) >>> 4. functools.calling_default: calling_default( f, a, DefaultA, b )-> >>> f( a, <default 2rd arg, even if not None>, b ) >> There are lots of possibilities for functools. If you actually want >> anything added, you'll need to back up your suggestions with use cases. >> Unless something is currently in widespread use in existing Python >> code, it's unlikely to be included in the standard library. >> >> STeVe > > Feel, hunch, affinity, and instinct are acceptable criteria for > judging. Otherwise, you're someone, and you have statistics on what > constitutes widespread use; I can tell what's good as well as you. > > Guido says, "Programmer time is important." If it saves time, on the > whole, writing plus learning plus reading, it's likely to be included. > > urllib was not "in widespread use" prior to inclusion, but they did, > was it? > > "> There are lots of possibilities for functools." > > So many, in fact, they're thinking of adding a separate "wrappertools" > module. > > Monarchies are effective on small scales. Is Python destined for the > small-time? > > I've seen these suggestions before; they did not receive impartial > address. > > Functools and the candidate "wrappertools" should be populated fairly > liberally.
Ultimately you either have to do the work or persuade someone else to do it. urllib was, as far as I know, distilled from code that had been written to solve real-world problems. Who knows whether Python is "destined for the small-time"? This kind of comment ignores the political and developmental realities: open source projects whose leaders don't communicate effectively with the rest of the developers tend to do worse. Guido is actually in pretty good touch with the developers, and still manages to take an interest in end-users of the language. It's all very well to talk about what "should" be included, but such ideas need an effective champion to promote them in the user community and collect valid use cases to present to the developers. Without such work, advocacy is likely to ineffective. This may not be ideal, but this is open source and that's by and large the way the process works. It does tend to reduce the kind of code bloat seen in proprietary products, where features are added to capture small individual market segments, and you end up with a monster whose users typically only utilize 5% of the feature set. So roll your sleeves up and make your case! There's work to be done ... regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
