Alan Gauld wrote:
> On 13/01/14 18:22, Peter Otten wrote:
>> Peter Otten wrote:
>
>> In the mean time here is my candidate:
>>
>> def test(a, b):
>> a = iter(a)
>> return all(c in a for c in b)
>
> That's pretty close to my original thoughts. But one question.
> Why explicitly convert string a to an iter? The 'in' test
> would work with the original string. What extra magic does
> iter confer? Or are you extending reuse beyond strings?
No, I wanted to give a solution for the problem as originally stated and as
attacked by Emile, where all characters have to occur in a in the same order
as in b, but with arbitrary garbage allowed in between. Compare:
>>> for debris, product in [("alph", "alpha"), ("alpha", "alpha"),
("axlypzha", "alpha"), ("alpha", "alpha"[::-1])]:
... print("debris: {}, product: {} --> test(): {}, (...): {}".format(
... debris, product, test(debris, product), all(c in debris for c in
product)))
...
debris: alph, product: alpha --> test(): False, (...): True
debris: alpha, product: alpha --> test(): True, (...): True
debris: axlypzha, product: alpha --> test(): True, (...): True
debris: alpha, product: ahpla --> test(): False, (...): True
The all(...) expression alone gets neither the count nor the order right.
The iter() call causes the `c in a` expression to search for the current c
only after the occurence of the previous c.
> And of course the original challenge was not for a
> boolean result but a specific string result so I'd
> go with:
>
> def test(a,b):
> return {True: b,
> False: 'Give me something that's not useless next time.'
> }[all(c in a for c in b)]
>
> or even
>
> def test(a,b)
> return b if all(c in a for c in b) else "Give me something that's
> not useless next time."
>
> Are we there yet? :-)
Where's there? When's yet?
;)
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
