On Sep 28, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Matthew Rocklin <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In toolz/itertoolz/recipes.py:
> 
> > @@ -15,4 +15,14 @@ def countby(func, seq):
> >      See Also:
> >          groupby
> >      """
> > -    return frequencies(imap(func, seq))
> > +    return frequencies(map(func, seq))
> > +
> > +
> > +def mapcat(f, seqs):
> recipes might be the wrong name. It doesn't mean examples to me though. I'm open to other names.
> 
compositions?  combinations?  combines?  composites?  Actually I kind of like composites, though I don't love it.  Prefer it to recipes, certainly.

> In language design one attempts to achieve a small but powerful core and then describe everything else in those terms. That way performance improvements on the core propagate outwards to the rest of the code. To me this is core.py.
> 
> One advantage is that porting becomes simpler. For example if we do threading/multiprocessing or PyPy support we should only need to look at core.py. It's advantageous to keep that small if possible.
> 
I do find that somewhat compelling.
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
>