a flattening operator?

Discussion in 'Python' started by gangesmaster, Apr 18, 2006.

  1. gangesmaster

    gangesmaster Guest

    as we all know, * (asterisk) can be used to "inline" or "flatten" a
    tuple into an argument list, i.e.:

    def f(a, b, c):
    x = (1,2,3)

    so... mainly for symmetry's sake, why not make a "flattening" operator
    that also works outside the context of function calls? for example:

    a = (1,2,3)
    b = (4,5)
    c = (*a, *b) # ==> (1,2,3,4,5)

    yeah, a + b would also give you the same result, but it could be used
    like format-strings, for "templating" tuples, i.e.

    c = (*a, 7, 8, *b)

    i used to have a concrete use-case for this feature some time ago, but
    i can't recall it now. sorry. still, the main argument is symmetry:
    it's a syntactic sugar, but it can be useful sometimes, so why limit it
    to function calls only?

    allowing it to be a generic operator would make things like this

    f(*args, 7) # an implied last argument, 7, is always passed to the

    today you have to do

    f(*(args + (7,)))

    which is quite ugly.

    and if you have to sequences, one being a list and the other being a
    tuple, e.g.
    x = [1,2]
    y = (3,4)

    you can't just x+y them. in order to concat them you'd have to use
    "casting" like
    f(*(tuple(x) + y))

    instead of
    f(*x, *y)

    isn't the latter more elegant?

    just an idea. i'm sure people could come up with more creative
    use-cases of a standard "flattening operator". but even without the
    creative use cases -- isn't symmetry strong enough an argument? why are
    function calls more important than regular expressions?

    and the zen proves my point:
    (*) Beautiful is better than ugly --> f(*(args + (7,))) is ugly
    (*) Flat is better than nested --> less parenthesis
    (*) Sparse is better than dense --> less noise
    (*) Readability counts --> again, less noise
    (*) Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules --> then why
    are function calls so special?

    the flattening operator would work on any sequence (having __iter__ or
    __next__), not just tuples and lists. one very useful feature i can
    thik of is "expanding" generators, i.e.:

    print xrange(10) # ==> xrange(10)
    print *xrange(10) # ==> (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

    i mean, python already supports this half-way:
    >>> def f(*args):

    .... print args
    >>> f(*xrange(10))

    (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

    so... why can't i just do "print *xrange(10)" directly? defining a
    function just to expand a generator? well, i could use
    "list(xrange(10))" to expand it, but it's less intuitive. the other way
    is list-comprehension, [x for x in xrange(10)], but isn't *xrange(10)
    more to-the-point?

    also, "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to
    do it"... so which one?
    (*) list(xrange(10))
    (*) [x for x in xrange(10)]
    (*) [].extend(xrange(10))
    (*) f(*xrange(10))

    they all expand generators, but which is the preferable way?

    and imagine this:

    f(*xrange(10), 7)

    this time you can't do *(xrange(10) + (7,)) as generators do not
    support addition... you'd have to do *(tuple(xrange(10)) + (7,)) which
    is getting quite long already.

    so as you can see, there are many inconsistencies between function-call
    expressions and regular expressions, that impose artificial limitations
    on the language. after all, the code is already in there to support
    function-call expressions. all it takes is adding support for regular

    what do you think? should i bring it up to python-dev?

    gangesmaster, Apr 18, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. In article <>,
    "gangesmaster" <> wrote:

    >as we all know, * (asterisk) can be used to "inline" or "flatten" a
    >tuple into an argument list, i.e.:
    >def f(a, b, c):
    > ...
    >x = (1,2,3)
    >so... mainly for symmetry's sake, why not make a "flattening" operator
    >that also works outside the context of function calls?

    def flatten(*a) :
    return a
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 22, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. I think by "regular expressions" you mean "expressions". "regular
    expressions" are what you get from "import re" .

    Michael Tobis, Apr 22, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. delgados129
    Apr 25, 2005
  2. David Gersic

    Flattening out an XML document

    David Gersic, May 24, 2005, in forum: XML
    David Gersic
    May 24, 2005
  3. Replies:
    Eddie Corns
    Mar 22, 2007
  4. Replies:
  5. Benjamin

    flattening a dict

    Benjamin, Feb 17, 2008, in forum: Python
    Feb 22, 2008

Share This Page