Very useful comments... Thanks to all!
Once again this community has demonstrated why Python is THE language.
jab
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Ziga Seilnach:
c = map(operator.mul, a, b)
Usually I like map a lot, but this time for me the l.c. version is a
bit simpler to understand (even if it's longer, and maybe slower too):
from operator import mul
from itertools import izip
a = [1, 2, 3]
b = [4, 5, 6]
map(mul, a, b)
[4, 10, 18]
There must be a better way to multiply the elements of one list by
another:
a = [1,2,3]
b = [1,2,3]
c = []
for i in range(len(a)):
c.append(a[i]*b[i])
a = c
print a
[1, 4, 9]
Perhaps a list comprehension or is this better addressed by NumPy?
Thanks,
jab
--
On 1 May 2006 08:28:12 -0700, BBands [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There must be a better way to multiply the elements of one list byanother:a = [1,2,3]b = [1,2,3]c = []for i in range(len(a)):c.append(a[i]*b[i])a = cprint a[1, 4, 9]
Something like:
[ x * y for x,y in zip(a,b) ]
[1, 4, 9]
:)
--
There must be a better way to multiply the elements of one list by
another:
a = [1,2,3]
b = [1,2,3]
c = []
for i in range(len(a)):
c.append(a[i]*b[i])
a = c
print a
[1, 4, 9]
Perhaps a list comprehension or is this better addressed by NumPy?
First of all: it's considered bad style
There must be a better way to multiply the elements of one list by
another:
a = [1,2,3]
b = [1,2,3]
c = []
for i in range(len(a)):
c.append(a[i]*b[i])
a = c
print a
[1, 4, 9]
Perhaps a list comprehension or is this better addressed by NumPy?
a = [1,2,3]
b = [1,2,3]
c = [q*r
Diez B. Roggisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
it's considered bad style to use range if all you want is a
enumeration of indices, as it will actually create a list of the size you
specified. Use xrange in such cases.
I'm pretty sure this distinction goes away in
David Isaac wrote:
it's considered bad style to use range if all you want is a
enumeration of indices, as it will actually create a list of the size you
specified. Use xrange in such cases.
I'm pretty sure this distinction goes away in 2.5.
3.0.
and for short sequences, it doesn't
and for short sequences, it doesn't really matter much in the 2.X series.
it's definitely not bad style to use range instead of xrange for a ten
to, say, 1000 item loop.
You and me are aware of that - but I figured the OP wasn't. And just the
other day somebody on de.c.l.py wondered about the
Diez wrote:
First of all: it's considered bad style to use range if all you want is a
enumeration of indices, as it will actually create a list of the size you
specified. Use xrange in such cases.
But maybe nicer is zip:
c = [av * bv for av, bv in zip(a, b)]
By your logic, shouldn't it also
Klaas schrieb:
Diez wrote:
First of all: it's considered bad style to use range if all you want is a
enumeration of indices, as it will actually create a list of the size you
specified. Use xrange in such cases.
But maybe nicer is zip:
c = [av * bv for av, bv in zip(a, b)]
By your
BBands wrote:
There must be a better way to multiply the elements of one list by
another:
[snipped]
Perhaps a list comprehension or is this better addressed by NumPy?
If you have a large amount of numerical code, it is definetly better to
use numpy, since it is intended just for that
12 matches
Mail list logo
