Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #46527
| References | <CAGVx7UWXAFHSHq37Ep-Vk=cM2wYrEGHSUhNc8s43bCvj_VcVow@mail.gmail.com> <CAGGBd_oT=vqvPGZy+d1H=XHjdPCmYUxJMXAwii7WH845xrYybQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.2389.1369876474.3114.python-list@python.org> <851ce96a-0223-42b0-8d99-902294c71f58@hc4g2000pbb.googlegroups.com> |
|---|---|
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
| Date | 2013-05-30 12:36 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.2443.1369939057.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:49 PM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 30, 6:14 am, Ma Xiaojun <damage3...@gmail.com> wrote: >> What interest me is a one liner: >> print '\n'.join(['\t'.join(['%d*%d=%d' % (j,i,i*j) for i in >> range(1,10)]) for j in range(1,10)]) > > Ha,Ha! The join method is one of the (for me) ugly features of python. > You can sweep it under the carpet with a one-line join function and > then write clean and pretty code: > > #joinwith > def joinw(l,sep): return sep.join(l) I don't object to changing the join method (one of the more shoe-horned string methods) back into a function, but to my eyes you've got the arguments backward. It should be: def join(sep, iterable): return sep.join(iterable) Putting the separator first feels more natural to me because I expect the separator to usually be short as compared to the iterable, which is often a longer expression (as is the case in both of your subsequent usages). Placing the separator first also preserves consistency of interface with the str.join and bytes.join functions, as well as the older string.join function.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Ma Xiaojun <damage3025@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 09:14 +0800
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-29 19:49 -0700
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 12:36 -0600
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 11:47 -0700
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? John Ladasky <john_ladasky@sbcglobal.net> - 2013-05-30 15:01 -0700
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 04:44 +1000
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-05-30 12:51 -0600
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-05-30 20:38 +0100
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 07:28 +1000
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-05-31 09:43 -0600
Re: How clean/elegant is Python's syntax? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-06-01 04:52 +1000
csiph-web