En Fri, 23 May 2008 15:03:16 -0300, Mensanator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > On May 23, 10:30 am, Sverker Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why are tables formatted like the following, when sorted? (Both in >> linux eg ls, ftp help, and in Python help() when listing (eg) >> modules)) >> >> (1) >> >> a g m s >> b h n t >> c i o u >> d j p v >> e k q >> f l r > > Because it's easier to read when the items have more > than one letter. Have a look at a dictionary. I agree with the OP. Dictionaries have two or more columns, but they span several *small* pages. The index above asumes an infinite page height, like a dictionary with all pages joined together making a single giant page. If dictionaries were sorted like the index above, "Python" could appear in the first page, and "Django" in the last one... >> In a pager, if you want to limit the number of lines output at a time, >> then yo'd see with (1) (if artifically limiting output to 2 lines): >> >> a g m s >> b h n t >> >> So to see the f item you would have to scroll down all the way. The >> number of times you would have to scroll down is in completely >> unrelated to the item's position in sort order. That seems to defeat >> the purpose of sorting in the first place. It feels strange, to me at >> least. Anybody had the same feeling? > > No. I do! >> Well, what's the rationale (if any) for using the layout (1)? >> Wouldn't layout (2) be better? And/or would it be confusing / >> non-pythonic / non-unlixonic if a program used the (2) layout instead? > The obvious solution is to do both, like the DOS directory > command: I'd use layout (1) *but* on a single page at a time. The layout you see on real dictionaries, or printed books. -- Gabriel Genellina -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
