Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #20791
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty |
| Followup-To | gmane.comp.python.general |
| Date | 2012-02-24 09:44 +0100 |
| Organization | None |
| References | <14ba4b39-4066-4d24-89d7-3c7c85aab85c@b18g2000vbz.googlegroups.com> <4f46e329$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4F4708AD.1020805@stoneleaf.us> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.115.1330073018.3037.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Followups directed to: gmane.comp.python.general
Ethan Furman wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:30:09 -0800, Alex Willmer wrote:
>>
>>> This week I was slightly surprised by a behaviour that I've not
>>> considered before. I've long used
>>>
>>> for i, x in enumerate(seq):
>>> # do stuff
>>>
>>> as a standard looping-with-index construct. In Python for loops don't
>>> create a scope, so the loop variables are available afterward. I've
>>> sometimes used this to print or return a record count e.g.
>>>
>>> for i, x in enumerate(seq):
>>> # do stuff
>>> print 'Processed %i records' % i+1
>>>
>>> However as I found out, if seq is empty then i and x are never created.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with enumerate. It applies to for loops in
>> general: the loop variable is not initialised if the loop never runs.
>> What value should it take? Zero? Minus one? The empty string? None?
>> Whatever answer Python choose would be almost always wrong, so it refuses
>> to guess.
>>
>>
>>> The above code will raise NameError. So if a record count is needed, and
>>> the loop is not guaranteed to execute the following seems more correct:
>>>
>>> i = 0
>>> for x in seq:
>>> # do stuff
>>> i += 1
>>> print 'Processed %i records' % i
>>
>> What fixes the problem is not avoiding enumerate, or performing the
>> increments in slow Python instead of fast C, but that you initialise the
>> loop variable you care about before the loop in case it doesn't run.
>>
>> i = 0
>> for i,x in enumerate(seq):
>> # do stuff
>>
>> is all you need: the addition of one extra line, to initialise the loop
>> variable i (and, if you need it, x) before hand.
>
> Actually,
>
> i = -1
>
> or his reporting will be wrong.
Yes, either
i = -1
for i, x in enumerate(seq):
...
print "%d records" % (i+1)
or
i = 0
for i, x in enumerate(seq, 1):
...
print "%d records" % i
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Alex Willmer <alex@moreati.org.uk> - 2012-02-23 16:30 -0800
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-02-24 01:08 +0000
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2012-02-23 19:49 -0800
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-02-24 07:10 +0000
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2012-02-24 09:44 +0100
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-02-23 17:21 -0800
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2012-02-24 04:32 -0800
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2012-02-24 13:44 +0100
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2012-02-24 14:14 +0100
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-02-24 14:54 +0000
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-24 15:00 +0000
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2012-02-24 16:16 +0100
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2012-02-28 14:56 -0800
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-02-29 10:24 +1100
Re: A quirk/gotcha of for i, x in enumerate(seq) when seq is empty Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-02-29 00:18 +0000
csiph-web