On Aug 16, 1:49 am, alex23 <wuwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2:37 pm, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The reading proceeds naturally from right to left.
>
> Well, "naturally" if you're coding in Hebrew or Japanese perhaps :)
Yes :). I typo-ed that one. It was getting late when i sent that
reply. I did consider posting an edit however i decided not to and
instead, wait and see who would notice.
The map feels much better too as a consequence:
rb> [3,100,-20].map{|x| x.to_f}
[3.0, 100.0, -20.0]
And you can can induce some logic without a clunky lambda.
rb>[3,100,-20].map{|x| if x > 99 then x.to_f else x end}
[3.0, 100.0, -20.0]
in Python you'd have to create a def for that (i know bad "specific"
example but the need is there)
It feels just like a Python list comprehension though:
py> [float(x) for x in [3,100,-20]]
Even though it reads in a non-linear way, you could argue that the
most important part (float(x)). is front-and-center. Of course i like
the compactness of python's map function:
py> map(float, [3,100,-20])
But all too often the map function is insufficient AND you cannot use
map in a chain! If only we could find a happy medium between Python
and Ruby oh what a bliss that would be. We could cut off all of
Pythons warts and destroy all of Rubys multiplicity and "singular
paridigm-ness".
* Forced indention (exactly one tab, and one tab only!)
* No multiplicity!
* Nice linear expressions!
* Name spaces!
* Implicit modules!
* Only "truly heterogeneous" built-in functions allowed!
* Enough freedom to be expressive, but not enough to allow sloppy-
ness.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
