News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The 2,500 year old history of why Python’s all([]) returns True. Parent comment

Re:The 2,500 year old history of why Python’s all([]) return... by Tyr42 on Wednesday March 18, 2020 @10:52AM (#22617263)
How about a priority heap? It's much more useful to sort things by their min priority, but just telling me the priority at the end isn't helpful. You'll want the thing as well.

(Even more concretely consider a min heap used in pathfinding, where you store the (distance_so_far, (x,y)) pairs, and they sort by distance_so_far.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 2,500 year old history of why Python’s all([]) return... by lmm on Wednesday March 18, 2020 @10:47PM (#22623884)
> How about a priority heap? It's much more useful to sort things by their min priority, but just telling me the priority at the end isn't helpful. You'll want the thing as well.

Sure, but again, at that point you're not taking the minimum thing, you're taking the thing with the minimum priority. And it wouldn't be strange to say that two things have the same priority (even if they're different things).

[ Parent | on HN ]