On 18/02/17 19:35, Mikhail V wrote:
You mean what my proposal would bring
technically better than e.g.:
for i,e in enumerate(Seq)
Well, nothing, and I will simply use it,
with only difference it could be:
for i,e over enumerate(Seq)
In this case only space holes will be
smoothed out, so pure
On Feb 18, 2017 02:30, "Mikhail V" wrote:
On 18 February 2017 at 04:13, Joao S. O. Bueno
wrote:
> I don't see the point in continuing this thread.
How does this add to the syntax discussion?
I was replying to Nicks quite vague comments
which were
On 18 February 2017 at 04:13, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> You can still use range.
Yes thats what I do, see my proposal
> I don't see the point in continuing this thread.
How does this add to the syntax discussion?
I was replying to Nicks quite vague comments
which were
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 06:31:19PM +0100, Mikhail V wrote:
> I have said I need the index, probably you've misread my last comment.
> Further more I explained why I think iteration over index should be the
> preferred way, it help with readability a lot.
Your concept of readability is clearly
A short Meta-note: I see most people are bottom-replying
and still many do top-reply, namely you Nick always do.
I dont know if there is a rule, but it makes quite hard to
manage/read post with mixed posting style.
On 17 February 2017 at 23:51, Nick Timkovich wrote:
>
>
Iterating over range(len(collection)) is one of the worst anti-patterns in
Python. I take great pains to slap my students who do that.
On Feb 17, 2017 9:32 AM, "Mikhail V" wrote:
>
> On 17 February 2017 at 17:37, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:31 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
> I have said I need the index, probably you've misread my last comment.
> Further more I explained why I think iteration over index should be the
> preferred way, it help with readability a lot.
Further discussion probably
On 17 February 2017 at 04:59, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> > Common use case:
> >
> > L = [1,3,5,7]
> >
> > for i over len(L):
> >e = L[i]
> >
> > or:
> >
> > length = len(L)
> > for i over length:
> >
On 17.02.2017 04:59, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
Common use case:
L = [1,3,5,7]
for i over len(L):
e = L[i]
or:
length = len(L)
for i over length:
e = L[i]
Better use case:
for i, e in enumerate(L):
I totally
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> Common use case:
>
> L = [1,3,5,7]
>
> for i over len(L):
>e = L[i]
>
> or:
>
> length = len(L)
> for i over length:
>e = L[i]
Better use case:
for i, e in enumerate(L):
ChrisA
Here is a summary of my idea about for-loop.
It focuses on readability and does not
take in account possible technical nuances.
This is my first attempt to write a full proposal
and I suppose it is ok to post it here.
Many things (readability) can raise opinion based dispute,
so it is sort of my
11 matches
Mail list logo