Hans Georg Schaathun wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 13:50:54 -0400, Prasad, Ramit
<ramit.pra...@jpmchase.com> wrote:
: I find this argument to be flawed. Should I stop using built-in
: generators instead of range/xrange for looping through lists?
: Certainly for loops with loop counting are understood more widely
: than generators. Should I stop using any advanced feature Python
: because it is difficult to understand without knowing Python?
No; I'd suggest the most legible and intuitive construct that /does/ the
job. Never something which requires one extra (illegible) page to do
the job, or something which does not do the job at all.
: I may not have made the point well, but I cannot see any advantage
: for trying to program for the lowest common denominator.
Common to what? I'd try the lowest common denominator of
legibility and effictiveness.
It is just KISS.
'if li' *is* KISS.
~Ethan~
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
