On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Richard Arts <arts.rich...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Jussi Piitulainen > <jpiit...@ling.helsinki.fi> wrote: >> MRAB writes: >>> On 27/08/2010 20:43, Jussi Piitulainen wrote: >>>> Dave Angel writes: >>>>> Jussi Piitulainen wrote: >>>>>> Agreed. But is there any nicer way to spell .reverse than [::-1] >>>>>> in Python? There is .swapcase() but no .reverse(), right? >>>>>> >>>>> There can't be a .reverse() method on string, because it's >>>>> immutable. You could use >>>>> >>>>> "".join(reversed(pal)) >>>>> >>>>> but I'd prefer pal[::-1] as I said earlier. >>>> >>>> There could easily be a .reverse() method on strings. It would >>>> return the reversed string, like .swapcase() returns the swapcased >>>> string. >>> >>> Lists have a .reverse method, but it's an in-place reversal. In >>> order to reduce confusion, a string method which returned the string >>> reversed would be better called .reversed(). >> >> Yes, agreed. >> >> Meanwhile, I have decided to prefer this: >> >> def palindromep(s): >> def reversed(s): >> return s[::-1] >> return s == reversed(s) >> -- >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >> > > That seems like a bit of overkill... Why would you want to define a > function in a function for something trivial like this? Just > > def palindrome(s): > return s[::-1] > > will do fine. > > Of course, you can stick the inner function in a library somewhere if you > like. > > Regards, > Richard >
Duh, of course I mean def palindrome(s): return s == s[::-1] I'm sorry. Richard -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
