I hope you don't mind if I critique your code a bit!
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Kiuhnm
<kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo...@mail.python.org> wrote:
> Here we go.
>
> --->
> def genCur(f, unique = True, minArgs = -1):
It is customary in Python for unsupplied arguments with no default to
use the value None, not -1. That's what it exists for.
> """ Generates a 'curried' version of a function. """
> def geng(curArgs, curKwargs):
> def g(*args, **kwargs):
> nonlocal f, curArgs, curKwargs, minArgs; # our STATIC data
>
> if len(args) or len(kwargs):
Collections evaluate as true if they are not empty, so this could just be:
if args or kwargs:
> # Allocates data for the next 'g'. We don't want to modify our
> # static data.
> newArgs = curArgs[:];
> newKwargs = dict.copy(curKwargs);
>
> # Adds positional arguments.
> newArgs += args;
>
> # Adds/updates keyword arguments.
> if unique:
> # We don't want repeated keyword arguments.
> for k in kwargs.keys():
> if k in newKwargs:
> raise(Exception("Repeated kw arg while unique =
> True"));
> newKwargs.update(kwargs);
Since you're writing this for Python 3 (as evidenced by the use of the
nonlocal keyword), you could take advantage here of the fact that
Python 3 dictionary views behave like sets. Also, you should use a
more specific exception type:
if unique and not kwargs.keys().isdisjoint(newKwargs):
raise ValueError("A repeated keyword argument was supplied")
> # Checks whether it's time to evaluate f.
> if minArgs >= 0 and minArgs <= len(newArgs) + len(newKwargs):
With minArgs defaulting to None, that would be:
if minArgs is not None and minArgs <= len(newArgs) +
len(newKwargs):
> return f(*newArgs, **newKwargs); # f has enough args
> else:
> return geng(newArgs, newKwargs); # f needs some more
> args
> else:
> return f(*curArgs, **curKwargs); # the caller forced the
> evaluation
> return g;
> return geng([], {});
>
> def cur(f, minArgs = -1):
> return genCur(f, True, minArgs);
>
> def curr(f, minArgs = -1):
> return genCur(f, False, minArgs);
The names "cur" and "curr" are terrible. Good names should describe
what the function does without being too onerous to type, and the
addition of the duplicate "r" is not an obvious mnemonic for
remembering that the first one prohibits duplicate keyword arguments
and the second one allows them. Why not more descriptive names like
"curry" and "curry_unique"?
That's all I've got. All in all, it's pretty decent for a Python newbie.
Cheers,
Ian
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
