> What do you find most readable: your version, with an ad-hoc function > defined somewhere else, far away in the code, or a simpler: > for (x,y,z=0) in tupleList: > do_whatever_with_it()
I came up with the "ad-hoc function" to give a kind of replacement for the used syntax, in order not to ask why not immediately: for tuple in tupleList: do_whatever_with_it() ? Sure I like the syntax as long as I think in terms of unpacking tuples, but at the first glance I thought that the intention was to get only x, y from the tuple setting all z in the yielded tuples to zero (as suggested in this thread by giving the example of going from 3D down to 2D where with all z=0 the algorithm will remain the same). What about "for (x,y,if z not in tupleList: z=0 else: z=1) in tupleList" ? What if the tupleList is empty? Should existing z be set to zero or not after the line with the for loop was executed? Should for (,y) in tupleList: do_whatever_with_it() give only the y and for (,,z) in tupleList: only the z values? If it should become possible to use the "for (x,y,z=0) in tupleList" syntax, I would sure like also to have: "for (,,z) in tupleList" "for (x,y,if z not in tupleList: z=0 else: z=1) in tupleList" "for (x,y,if z not in tupleList: z=0 else: z=2*x*z) in tupleList" and sure also: "for (x,y,z=0, *r) in tupleList" etc. My only objections are: Is it worth the effort? Would it not be confusing? Maybe starting with e.g. a xlistcomprehension module where xlistcomprehension.execute( "[for (x,y,if z not in tupleList: z=0 else: z=1) in tupleList]" ) or just xl(...) to keep it short provides the desired functionality is a good idea? Then it can be seen if this module becomes widely used and therefore worth to be integrated? I think it would be nice to have, but I can't imagine it to be really very helpful. It is sure a long way before the concept of it becomes so mature, that all who see it say: Wow, why was it not from the very beginning there? Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
