A gnarly little python loop
cs at zip.com.au
Mon Nov 12 01:43:56 CET 2012
On 11Nov2012 11:16, Steve Howell <showell30 at yahoo.com> wrote:
| On Nov 11, 10:34 am, Peter Otten <__pete... at web.de> wrote:
| > Steve Howell wrote:
| > > On Nov 11, 1:09 am, Paul Rubin <no.em... at nospam.invalid> wrote:
| > >> Cameron Simpson <c... at zip.com.au> writes:
| > >> > | I'd prefer the original code ten times over this inaccessible beast.
| > >> > Me too.
| > >> Me, I like the itertools version better. There's one chunk of data
| > >> that goes through a succession of transforms each of which
| > >> is very straightforward.
| > > Thanks, Paul.
| > > Even though I supplied the "inaccessible" itertools version, I can
| > > understand why folks find it inaccessible. As I said to the OP, there
| > > was nothing wrong with the original imperative approach; I was simply
| > > providing an alternative.
| > > It took me a while to appreciate itertools, but the metaphor that
| > > resonates with me is a Unix pipeline.
| > Actually you supplied the "accessible" itertools version. For reference,
| > here's the inaccessible version:
| I know Peter's version is tongue in cheek, but I do think that it has
| a certain expressive power, and it highlights three mind-expanding
| Python modules.
| Here's a re-flattened take on Peter's version ("Flat is better than
| nested." -- PEP 20):
Ok, who's going to quiz the OP on his/her uptake of these techniques...
Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au>
It's hard to make a man understand something when his livelihood depends
on him not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
More information about the Python-list