[Tutor] another better way to do this ?

[Keith Winston]

Yikes, Peter, that's scary. Wow.

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Peter Otten <__peter__ at web.de> wrote:
> Peter Otten wrote:
>
>> Emile van Sebille wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/12/2014 12:21 PM, Peter Otten wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> test("axbxc", "abc")
>>>> True
>>>>>>> test("abbxc", "abc")
>>>> False
>>>>
>>>> Is the second result desired?
>>>
>>> No -- the second should match -- you found a test case I didn't...
>>>
>>> def test(a,b):
>>>    for ii in a:
>>>      if ii not in b: a=a.replace(ii,"")
>>>      while ii+ii in a: a=a.replace(ii+ii,ii)
>>>    return b in a
>>>
>>> Show me another.  :)
>>
>>>>> def test(a,b):
>> ...    for ii in a:
>> ...      if ii not in b: a=a.replace(ii,"")
>> ...      while ii+ii in a: a=a.replace(ii+ii,ii)
>> ...    return b in a
>> ...
>>>>> test("abac", "abc")
>> False
>
> In the mean time here is my candidate:
>
> def test(a, b):
>     a = iter(a)
>     return all(c in a for c in b)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tutor maillist  -  Tutor at python.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor



-- 
Keith