On 5/21/17, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 08:04:04AM +0200, Pavol Lisy wrote:
>
>> If fnmatch.filter was written to solve performance, isn't calling
>> _filtered step back?
>
> It adds overhead of *one* function call regardless of how many
> thousands or millions of names you ar
It would be nice to have the opposite of the pop() method: a push() method.
While insert() and append() already exist, neither is the opposite of pop().
pop() has a default index parameter -1, but neither insert() nor append() has a
default index parameter. push(obj) would be equivalent to inser
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Paul Laos wrote:
> By default push(obj) would insert an object to the end of the list, while
> push(obj, index) would insert the object at index, just like pop() removes
> (and returns) the object at the end of the list, and pop(index) removes
> (and returns) the
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Paul Laos wrote:
> It would be nice to have the opposite of the pop() method: a push()
> method. While insert() and append() already exist, neither is the opposite
> of pop(). pop() has a default index parameter -1, but neither insert() nor
> append() has a defau
On 22 May 2017 at 00:43, Paul Laos wrote:
> So while it has been discussed before, it's worth bringing up again, since
> this was before the release of Python 2.0.
It was also before the addition of collections.deque. which uses
appendleft() and extendleft(), rather than pushleft().
> Pros:
>
>
