+1 very useful also for me. Once in a while I have this exact
scenario. Not often enough to get annoyed, but often enough that it
would be nice to have.
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 20:27, Noam Yorav-Raphael wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> There's a simple function that I use many times, and I think may be a goo
Check the thread
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/thread/REYDJFCXQNQG4SAWKELQMCGM77IZG47Q/#CGMWPLJME4ZZNGHDY4DGCSF347VBMAKZ
There are comments in favor of both first and one.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 3:59 PM Noam Yorav-Raphael
wrote:
> Thanks! It's good to hear that
Thanks! It's good to hear that you too find it useful.
Since adding methods to built-in types is much heavier than adding one
function to a module, l suggest keeping this discussion focused on adding
just the one() function to itertools, and see if there is enough support
for this.
Cheers,
Noam
In my personal toolbox of utility functions, this is by far the function I
use most often, although it's implemented slightly differently and I call
it `only`. I think it's very useful and it would be great to have in the
standard library to encourage people to write safer code.
Often this is part
