S
Steven Bethard
So, as I understand it, in Python 3000, zip will basically be replaced
with izip, meaning that instead of returning a list, it will return an
iterator. This is great for situations like:
zip(*[iter1, iter2, iter3])
where I want to receive tuples of (item1, item2, item3) from the
iterables. But it doesn't work well for a situation like:
zip(*tuple_iter)
where tuple_iter is an iterator to tuples of the form
(item1, item2, item3) and I want to receive three iterators, one to the
item1s, one to the item2s and one to the item3s. I don't think this
is too unreasonable of a desire as the current zip, in a situation like:
zip(*tuple_list)
where tuple_list is a list of tuples of the form (item1, item2, item3),
returns a list of three tuples, one of the item1s, one of the item2s and
one of the item3s.
Of course, the reason this doesn't work currently is that the fn(*itr)
notation converts 'itr' into a tuple, exhausting the iterator:
.... for i in xrange(x):
.... yield (i, i+1, i+2)
.... print "exhausted"
....exhausted
[(0, 1, 2, 3), (1, 2, 3, 4), (2, 3, 4, 5)]
What I would prefer is something like:
(<iterator object at ...>, <iterator object at ..., <iterator object at ...)
Of course, I can write a separate function that will do what I want
here[1] -- my question is if Python's builtin zip will support this in
Python 3000. It's certainly not a trivial change -- it requires some
pretty substantially backwards incompatible changes in how *args is
parsed for a function call -- namely that fn(*itr) only extracts as many
of the items in the iterable as necessary, e.g.
.... print x, y, args
.... print list(it.islice(args, 4))
....0 1 count(2)
[2, 3, 4, 5]
So I guess my real question is, should I expect Python 3000 to play
nicely with *args and iterators? Are there reasons (besides backwards
incompatibility) that parsing *args this way would be bad?
Steve
[1] In fact, with the help of the folks from this list, I did:
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/302325
with izip, meaning that instead of returning a list, it will return an
iterator. This is great for situations like:
zip(*[iter1, iter2, iter3])
where I want to receive tuples of (item1, item2, item3) from the
iterables. But it doesn't work well for a situation like:
zip(*tuple_iter)
where tuple_iter is an iterator to tuples of the form
(item1, item2, item3) and I want to receive three iterators, one to the
item1s, one to the item2s and one to the item3s. I don't think this
is too unreasonable of a desire as the current zip, in a situation like:
zip(*tuple_list)
where tuple_list is a list of tuples of the form (item1, item2, item3),
returns a list of three tuples, one of the item1s, one of the item2s and
one of the item3s.
Of course, the reason this doesn't work currently is that the fn(*itr)
notation converts 'itr' into a tuple, exhausting the iterator:
.... for i in xrange(x):
.... yield (i, i+1, i+2)
.... print "exhausted"
....exhausted
[(0, 1, 2, 3), (1, 2, 3, 4), (2, 3, 4, 5)]
((0, 1, 2, 3), (1, 2, 3, 4), (2, 3, 4, 5))exhausted
What I would prefer is something like:
(<iterator object at ...>, <iterator object at ..., <iterator object at ...)
Of course, I can write a separate function that will do what I want
here[1] -- my question is if Python's builtin zip will support this in
Python 3000. It's certainly not a trivial change -- it requires some
pretty substantially backwards incompatible changes in how *args is
parsed for a function call -- namely that fn(*itr) only extracts as many
of the items in the iterable as necessary, e.g.
.... print x, y, args
.... print list(it.islice(args, 4))
....0 1 count(2)
[2, 3, 4, 5]
So I guess my real question is, should I expect Python 3000 to play
nicely with *args and iterators? Are there reasons (besides backwards
incompatibility) that parsing *args this way would be bad?
Steve
[1] In fact, with the help of the folks from this list, I did:
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/302325