On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Mike Miller <python-id...@mgmiller.net> wrote: > > On 2018-03-03 16:51, Greg Ewing wrote: >>> >>> 2018-03-03 8:40 GMT+01:00 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>: >>>> >>>> pairs = [(f(y), g(y)) for x in things with bind(h(x)) as y] >> >> >> I don't mucn like "with bind(h(x)) as y" because it's kind of >> like an abstraction inversion -- you're building something >> complicated on top of something complicated in order to get >> something simple, instead of just having the simple thing >> to begin with. If nothing else, it has a huge runtime cost >> for the benefit it gives. > > > Reading this thread I was thinking that the assignment part was happening > too far away from where the action was and came up with this variant: > > [ f(y), g(y) for x, y as h(x) in things ] > > Plus or minus an extra set of parentheses for clarity.
Did you mean: [ f(y), g(y) for x, h(x) as y in things ] ? Elsewhere in Python, "a as b" takes "a" and binds it to the name "b". Otherwise, I'm not sure what you meant. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
