This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | rhettinger |
|---|---|
| Recipients | KirkMcDonald, rhettinger |
| Date | 2007年12月18日.07:14:12 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.0024203479 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1197962055.15.0.663656692447.issue1643@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Sorry, I'm not interested in adding this to the module. Discussions to- date on the subject seem to show more interest in playing with grouper variants than in actual use cases. While the recipe given in the docs is somewhat opaque, it runs at C-speed (zero trips around the eval- loop) and it is encapsulated in a re-usable function. Writing this in C does nothing to improve the situation. Also, when people like to play with variants, there is no general agreement on useful requirements (like fill-in behavior or raising an exception on uneven length inputs). Trying to write option to meet all needs (n=2, step=1) makes the code more difficult to learn and use -- see several variants in Alex's Python Cookbook. Another issue is that we have to be very selective about adding tools to the module. Each addition makes the overall toolset harder to use -- it is better to have a good set of basic building blocks. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2007年12月18日 07:14:15 | rhettinger | set | spambayes_score: 0.00242035 -> 0.0024203479 recipients: + rhettinger, KirkMcDonald |
| 2007年12月18日 07:14:15 | rhettinger | set | spambayes_score: 0.00242035 -> 0.00242035 messageid: <1197962055.15.0.663656692447.issue1643@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2007年12月18日 07:14:14 | rhettinger | link | issue1643 messages |
| 2007年12月18日 07:14:12 | rhettinger | create | |