I actually find the map biz easier to get my head around than the list
comp. I guess this makes it another good reason for me to be happy
that map is apparently staying in after nearly being depreciated. I
generally prefer list comp in every instance, but the idea of an if
else construct within the conditional of a list comp really hurts my
brain, but it is nice to see that, had map(), filter() and reduce()
all gotten the boot, there is a way to do it with a list comp, opaque
as it is.
Thanks to all who responded this.
-kp--
On Sep 6, 2009, at 5:29 AM, Mark Tolonen wrote:
"Douglas Philips" <d...@mac.com> wrote in message news:9ee00578-6af7-4c6c-9968-af5f25a00...@mac.com
...
On 2009 Sep 5, at 12:22 PM, Mark Tolonen wrote:
As a list comp:
L=range(30,41)
[{38:34,40:39}.get(n,n) for n in L]
[30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 34, 39, 39]
True, that is terse, but IMHO has maintainability issues. The
mapping data structure and the method of transformation (.get())
are tangled in with the transformation itself.
Again, IMHO, unless this is a very short script, the maintenance
should outweigh raw terseness.
This *was* a very short script. My point was using a list comp. If
you want to nitpick, don't use lower-case L for variables either :^)
my_map = { 38: 34, 40: 39 }
def filter_item(item):
return my_map.get(item, item)
L = [filteritem(n) for n in L]
Happy?
-Mark
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
