I just started learning python and I have been wondering. Is there a
short pythonic way to find the element, x, of a list, mylist, that
maximizes an expression f(x).
In other words I am looking for a short version of the following:
pair=[mylist[0],f(mylist[0])]
for x in mylist[1:]:
if f(x) >
Niels L Ellegaard wrote:
> I just started learning python and I have been wondering. Is there a
> short pythonic way to find the element, x, of a list, mylist, that
> maximizes an expression f(x).
>
> In other words I am looking for a short version of the following:
>
> pair=[mylist[0],f(mylist[0]
wrote:
>> In other words I am looking for a short version of the following:
>>
>> pair=[mylist[0],f(mylist[0])]
>> for x in mylist[1:]:
>> if f(x) > pair[1]:
>>pair=[x,f(x)]
>
> this is already very short, what else you want? May be this :
>
> max(((f(x), x) for x in mylist))
>
Duncan Booth wrote:
> wrote:
>
> >> In other words I am looking for a short version of the following:
> >>
> >> pair=[mylist[0],f(mylist[0])]
> >> for x in mylist[1:]:
> >> if f(x) > pair[1]:
> >>pair=[x,f(x)]
> >
> > this is already very short, what else you want? May be this :
>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> thanks. I don't know what max can or cannot compare.
Just the same things that you can compare with, say, < .
I believe in 2.5 max and min will also accept a key= argument (like
sorted etc) to tweak what to compare, so max(thelist, key=f) should then
work (but
Alex Martelli wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> > thanks. I don't know what max can or cannot compare.
>
> Just the same things that you can compare with, say, < .
>
> I believe in 2.5 max and min will also accept a key= argument (like
> sorted etc) to tweak what to compare, so max(th
On 1 Dec 2005 05:45:54 -0800, "Niels L Ellegaard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I just started learning python and I have been wondering. Is there a
>short pythonic way to find the element, x, of a list, mylist, that
>maximizes an expression f(x).
>
>In other words I am looking for a short version o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks. In that case, would it be easier to understand(beside the
> original iterative loop) if I use reduce and lambda ?
>
You could try putting them side by side and seeing which is easiest for
someone to understand:
reduce(lambda (mv,mx), (v,x): mv > v and (mv,mx) o
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> As while DSU is a very smart way to guard the max compare thing, it is
> still being introduced as a way that is not related to the original
> problem, i.e. I just want to compare f(x)
And that's why in 2.5 you'll just code max(mylist, key=f) to express
this int
