On Feb 6, 3:23 pm, Rhamphoryncus <rha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 5, 1:16 pm, Michele Simionato <michele.simion...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Feb 5, 7:24 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > > > > In article > > > <a22c77c4-a812-4e42-8972-6f3eedf72...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, > > > Michele Simionato <michele.simion...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >Looks fine to me. In some situations you may also use hasattr(el, > > > >'__iter__') instead of isinstance(el, list) (it depends if you want to > > > >flatten generic iterables or only lists). > > > > Of course, once you do that, you need to special-case strings... > > > Strings are iterable but have no __iter__ method, which is fine in > > this context, since I would say 99.9% of times one wants to treat them > > as atomic objects, so no need to special case. > > Don't worry, that little oddity was fixed for you: > > Python 3.0+ (unknown, Dec 8 2008, 14:26:15) > [GCC 4.3.2] on linux2 > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.>>> > str.__iter__ > > <slot wrapper '__iter__' of 'str' objects>>>> bytes.__iter__ > > <slot wrapper '__iter__' of 'bytes' objects>>>> bytearray.__iter__ > > <slot wrapper '__iter__' of 'bytearray' objects> > > I'm in the "why do you need more than 1 depth?" camp. Dispatching > based on your own type should be given an extra look. Dispatching > based passed in types should be given three extra looks. > > I didn't realize itertools.chain(*iterable) worked. I guess that > needs to be pushed as the canonical form.
What about this (from the Recipes section of the itertools manual)? def flatten(listOfLists): return list(chain.from_iterable(listOfLists)) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list