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