Sven R. Kunze srkunze at mail.de
Tue Sep 6 14:37:13 EDT 2016

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-ideas] Shuffled
• Next message (by thread): [Python-ideas] Shuffled
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

Are you serious? The reason for "we don't need standardization" == 
"there is a solution, long, and with a lot of special characters". Holy 
c***. I remember Python being the least verbose language on the planet. 
I suspect this argument didn't lead to status quo. It's like saying, we 
don't need variable annotations because we have comments.


On 06.09.2016 20:25, אלעזר wrote:
> Naive shuffled() can be emulated using a single expression:
>
>    sorted(lst, key=lambda _: random())
>
> So there's even less incentive for standardization.

Besides being a silly argument, it's an interesting solution.

Does it really work? I remember Microsoft utilizing a similar approach 
for their browser selection tool which led to a skewed probability 
distribution. Maybe, I wrong here though.


Cheer,
Sven

---

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-ideas] Shuffled
• Next message (by thread): [Python-ideas] Shuffled
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list