| 1 |
René 'Necoro' Neumann yazmış: |
| 2 |
> What's the best way to send patches for the patches ;) ? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
In this particular case you shouldn't send patches for patches, so it's |
| 5 |
not a problem, see below ;) |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
<snip> |
| 8 |
> But the complete expression could be rewritten as: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> return [int(fd) for fd in os.listdir("/proc/%i/fd" % os.getpid()) if |
| 11 |
> fd.isdigit()] |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> This is more readable - and you don't need to traverse the list multiple |
| 14 |
> times. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Alternatively - if you like the functional style more: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> return list(map(int, filter(str.isdigit, os.listdir("/proc/%i/fd" % |
| 19 |
> os.getpid())))) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Again more readable (if you are used to the functional style ;)) - and only |
| 22 |
> one traversal (as iterators are used). |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Portage aims for 2.4 compatibility and your snippets should work on 2.4 |
| 26 |
afaik. So you can submit it as a patch to the current trunk. |
| 27 |
Changing the automatically generated output is not a good idea. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> Regards, |
| 30 |
> Necoro |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Regards, |
| 34 |
Ali Polatel |
Archives