Movatterモバイル変換

Unbound methods of types

• Previous message (by thread):Unbound methods of types
• Next message (by thread):Unbound methods of types
• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

"Ben Hutchings" <ben.hutchings at roundpoint.com> wrote in messagenews:u1yqb17us.fsf at roundpoint.com...    [snip]> lists, there is no such module to help.  To pick a better example, I> can't say:>>     map(types.DictType.keys, [{'a':1,'b':2,'c':3}, {'d':4,'e':5,'f':6}])>> and get back something like:>>     [['b', 'c', 'a'], ['f', 'd', 'e']]>> and there is no module dict with a function keys that would help me> here.  Instead I have to use 'lambda d: d.keys()'.  Actually, I could> just use a list comprehension here; but if I wanted an unbound type> method for some other purpose I'd have to resort to that lambdaI understand your issue, but, just to clarify things for otherreaders: there is NO case that I know of, in Python, where oneHAS to use lambda; a named local/nested function will always doat least as well, e.g.:    def keysOf(d): return d.keys()    map(keysOf, [{'a':1,'b':2,'c':3}, {'d':4,'e':5,'f':6}])But that is by the by -- the only substantial difference betweensuch a named function and a lambda is, indeed, the name.  It *would*be interesting to be able to get an "unbound method" from a generictype, or un-bind a builtin bound-method such as {}.keys (but, alas,the __self__ of that object is read-only)...Alex

• Previous message (by thread):Unbound methods of types
• Next message (by thread):Unbound methods of types
• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]