Gregory Guthrie a écrit :
> I am comparing Python to a few other scripting languages, and used a simple
> anagrams program as a sample.
>
> I was surprised ast a few python features that did not work as I would
> expect/wish; which caused less compact/expressive program styles that I
> wanted - reverting to a FORTRAN like series of assignments.
>
> For example,
> - why is len() not a member function of strings? Instead one says len(w).
The member function of strings is __len__, which itself is called by
len() when passed a string. wrt/ why it is so, you'll have to ask to
someone more knowledgeable, but I seriously don't see what difference
it make in practice.
> - Why doesn't sort() return a value?
If it's not in the FAQ, then it should - and the googling c.l.py
archives for this should give some relevant answers.
> This would allow things like:
> key = '',join( list(word.lower().strip()).sort() )
key = ''.join(list(sorted(word.lower().strip()))
> - Another feature I assumed but it failed, is a nice default for
> dictionaries, and more += like operations;
> For example: to acculumate words in a dictionary -
> dict[key] += [word]
>
> Instead of:
> mark[key] = mark.get(key,[]) + [word]
mark.setdefault(key, []).append(word)
> The former seems very intuitive, and clearer.
and is much more error prone for few practical gain (assertion backed by
experience with languages allowing it).
> I am a bit used to the compactness and convenient defaults of Perl, which
> would do this:
> my $key = join '', sort(split(//, lc($word)));
> push @{$anagrams{$key}}, $word
key = ''.join(list(sorted(word.lower().strip()))
anagrams.setdefault(key, []).append(word)
> I am curious why these "obvious" conveniences are not present. :-)
You said ?-)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
