Classical FP problem in python : Hamming problem
Jeff Shannon
jeff at ccvcorp.com
Tue Jan 25 20:46:04 CET 2005
Bengt Richter wrote:
> On 25 Jan 2005 08:30:03 GMT, Nick Craig-Wood <nick at craig-wood.com> wrote:
>
>>If you are after readability, you might prefer this...
>>
>>def hamming():
>> def _hamming():
>> yield 1
>> for n in imerge(imap(lambda h: 2*h, iter(hamming2)),
>> imerge(imap(lambda h: 3*h, iter(hamming3)),
>> imap(lambda h: 5*h, iter(hamming5)))):
>> yield n
>> hamming2, hamming3, hamming5, result = tee(_hamming(), 4)
>> return result
>
> Are the long words really that helpful?
>
> def hamming():
> def _hamming():
> yield 1
> for n in imerge(imap(lambda h: 2*h, iter(hg2)),
> imerge(imap(lambda h: 3*h, iter(hg3)),
> imap(lambda h: 5*h, iter(hg5)))):
> yield n
> hg2, hg3, hg5, result = tee(_hamming(), 4) # four hamming generators
> return result
Well, judging by the fact that shortening the identifiers made it so
that you felt the need to add a comment indicating what they were
identifying, I'd say that yes, the long words *are* helpful. ;)
Comments are good, but self-documenting code is even better.
Jeff Shannon
Technician/Programmer
Credit International
More information about the Python-list
mailing list