> its interesting that these are not necessarily idiomatic python despite being a slightly higher level abstraction. note they are idiomatic in all "real" functional languages, which python is decidedly not. also list comprehensions are faster than map/filter in python. (this is probably python's fault and is really dumb because you could just implement map/filter as a list comprehension. some people have criticized Guido for some of his design choices.)
I don't miss map/reduce syntax the slightest. List comprehensions (for when I need to read multiple times a list result) and generators expressions (for lazy evaluation and genericity) are incredibly readable and efficient .
Here's an example script[0] I threw in a cron to report on some daily FTP transfers from a legacy system. Those list comprehensions are very descriptive, like a mathematical set syntax. In comparison e.g Ruby's map/inject feels terribly awkward and alien to me. [1] (and [2], although a bit academic) is an invaluable resource on the subject.
I don't miss map/reduce syntax the slightest. List comprehensions (for when I need to read multiple times a list result) and generators expressions (for lazy evaluation and genericity) are incredibly readable and efficient .
Here's an example script[0] I threw in a cron to report on some daily FTP transfers from a legacy system. Those list comprehensions are very descriptive, like a mathematical set syntax. In comparison e.g Ruby's map/inject feels terribly awkward and alien to me. [1] (and [2], although a bit academic) is an invaluable resource on the subject.
[0] https://gist.github.com/2492951
[1] http://www.dabeaz.com/generators/
[2] http://www.dabeaz.com/coroutines/