Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: Ian Kelly Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Consistent error Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 09:27:50 -0700 Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <6f54629c-745f-4f75-a267-0f174cc1aea1@googlegroups.com> <2a7c4d1e-b7ba-4fb7-845f-440026af3b59@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 51IeXREArD/+jLz2cUXqOQ3JZxEdVHjp+JutKGU8Mchw== Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.009 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'assignment': 0.07; 'unittest': 0.07; 'jan': 0.11; 'subject:error': 0.11; 'def': 0.13; '2016': 0.16; 'add,': 0.16; 'list"': 0.16; 'quoted': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'rewritten': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'algorithm': 0.20; 'fix': 0.21; 'fixing': 0.22; 'am,': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'not.': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'function': 0.28; 'looks': 0.29; 'testing.': 0.29; 'error.': 0.31; 'largest': 0.31; 'know.': 0.34; 'thanks!': 0.34; 'advice': 0.35; 'gives': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'lines': 0.36; 'received:209.85': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'thanks': 0.37; 'received:209.85.213': 0.37; 'seem': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.38; 'anything': 0.38; 'test': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'still': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'post,': 0.84; 'to:name:python': 0.84; 'step.': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=UKLSOjqMf2RtwWZjMOMB2pJrCKgutM/7bfn6y+2xT3g=; b=HR9Hn+KtKZByUaWauiC55YVpW4JRUUGtdzmIRuGs+j3j2rl11WhdmmiNjN1layMHz8 LJ44Bw1ghT4Pse3mefoJCt0AqrtRnEyZ8w6QfHQCgkhSvQ7nT2v1QW7xMynYE/jWh066 XA1/bOym4dRL8KQMs48TRdCV2LfTJwV6EPuncCAUaurP4JuRKo1wrNJHNPNifamNZ8HD GI5OnOGV9EsU/VlmTbpdztbhq/5wlWnCFBijP2/6AHGUxdhWc0+qnZ9lYt6WR010kMP3 A4+Xif86ZNQLl3FjDfg1YfLCn9EugFb4N1jjruySf7KxSbVPmEb14H5Y0VeKuscxFVZc qpxg== X-Received: by 10.50.65.39 with SMTP id u7mr78942132igs.85.1451838509300; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 08:28:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2a7c4d1e-b7ba-4fb7-845f-440026af3b59@googlegroups.com> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:101213 On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 8:59 AM, wrote: > Thanks Chris! > Don't worry about the indent, will fix it > I've rewritten it to this- > > def get_algorithm_result( numlist ): >> largest = numlist[0] >> i = 1 >> while ( i < len(numlist) ): > i = i + 1 >> if ( largest < numlist[i]): >> largest = numlist[i] >> numlist[i] = numlist[-1] >> numlist = [1,2,3,4,5] > return largest This is even harder to read than before since some of the lines are now quoted and some are not. >> def prime_number(x): >> return len([n for n in range(1, x + 1) if x % n == 0]) <= 2 > > But it still gives the test_maximum_number_one error. > Please if you have any ideas what else I should change or add, let me know. Thanks! It's hard to give any specific advice about fixing the unittest failure without knowing what the test is testing. These two lines don't seem to have anything to do with the algorithm that you quoted in the first post, however: > numlist[i] = numlist[-1] > numlist = [1,2,3,4,5] It looks like you should kill everything in this function after the assignment to largest and then start reimplementing the algorithm again from the " If Li is last number from the list" step.