Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #104831

Re: Simple exercise

Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Date 2016-03-14 09:00 -0700
References (2 earlier) <mailman.163.1457659326.15725.python-list@python.org> <nbt7qr$4fa$1@dont-email.me> <mailman.167.1457661831.15725.python-list@python.org> <88c5b5fa-66a0-461a-8ae4-b3264b32f679@googlegroups.com> <mailman.101.1457968006.12893.python-list@python.org>
Message-ID <aa78efbd-b89e-45d2-b528-dc9768c43b89@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: Simple exercise
From Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 10:06:56 AM UTC-5, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 14 March 2016 at 14:35, Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I would strongly warn anyone against using the zip function
> > unless
> ...
> > I meant to say: absolutely, one hundred percent *SURE*, that
> > both sequences are of the same length, or, absolutely one
> > hundred percent *SURE*, that dropping values is not going to
> > matter. For that reason, i avoid the zip function like the
> > plague. I would much rather get an index error, than let an
> > error pass silently.
> 
> I also think it's unfortunate that zip silently discards items. Almost
> always when I use zip I would prefer to see an error when the two
> iterables are not of the same length. 

Yes. zip is no doubt more Pythonic than any indexing will
ever be, but without a way to manage this "discarding
issue", i can't justify using the function. There are three
possible ways to solve this dilemma:

  (1) Add a keyword argument to zip, something like
  "validateLengths" -- which will default to False. 
  
  (2) Create a new zip function called "strictzip" which
  will always throw and error when all of the sequences
  don't share the same length. 
  
  (3) Encourage every programmer to write their own wrapper
  around zip.

And since we've recently learned that Python programmers
have an aversion to typing, number three is out the
question.

> Of course you're not necessarily safer with len and range:
> 
> a = [1, 2, 3]
> b = 'abcde'
> 
> for n in range(len(a)):
>     print(a[n], b[n])

You make a valid point here. So i'm not 100% protected using
indexing, however, i am 100% unprotected using zip. Whew...
I'm still right, but *ONLY* because i'm not 100% wrong.

PS: For second there, i was afraid my impeccable reputation
might have been in jeopardy. O:-)

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Simple exercise Rodrick Brown <rodrick.brown@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 04:02 -0500
  Re: Simple exercise Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-10 11:30 +0100
    Re: Simple exercise Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-10 12:07 +0100
    Re: Simple exercise Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-10 17:05 +0100
      Re: Simple exercise Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-10 17:08 +0100
  Re: Simple exercise Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-03-11 12:24 +1300
    Re: Simple exercise Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 10:38 +1100
  Re: Simple exercise BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-11 00:05 +0000
    Re: Simple exercise Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-03-11 01:21 +0000
      Re: Simple exercise BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-11 01:45 +0000
        Re: Simple exercise Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 20:53 -0500
        Re: Simple exercise "Martin A. Brown" <martin@linux-ip.net> - 2016-03-10 17:56 -0800
        Re: Simple exercise Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-03-11 02:03 +0000
          Re: Simple exercise BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-03-11 02:18 +0000
          Re: Simple exercise Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 07:35 -0700
            Re: Simple exercise Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 15:06 +0000
              Re: Simple exercise Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 09:00 -0700
              Re: Simple exercise Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-15 10:59 +1100
                Re: Simple exercise Jussi Piitulainen <jussi.piitulainen@helsinki.fi> - 2016-03-15 07:26 +0200
                Re: Simple exercise Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-03-15 19:39 +1100
                Re: Simple exercise Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 19:53 +1100
                Re: Simple exercise Jussi Piitulainen <jussi.piitulainen@helsinki.fi> - 2016-03-15 11:04 +0200
                Re: Simple exercise Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 11:09 +0000
            Re: Simple exercise Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 09:16 -0600
              Re: Simple exercise Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 09:11 -0700
            Re: Simple exercise Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-03-14 15:23 +0000
            Re: Simple exercise Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2016-03-14 17:00 +0100
        Re: Simple exercise Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-03-11 02:05 +0000
      Re: Simple exercise Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 07:07 -0700
        Re: Simple exercise Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 10:13 -0400
        Re: Simple exercise alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-03-14 14:18 +0000
          Re: Simple exercise Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 08:22 -0700
            Re: Simple exercise MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2016-03-14 15:57 +0000
    Re: Simple exercise Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> - 2016-03-10 18:14 -0800
  Re: Simple exercise boffi <boffi@casa.sua> - 2016-03-17 22:28 +0100

csiph-web