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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #26298 > unrolled thread

Re: Linux shell to python

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Linux shell to python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-31 08:15 +0100
    Re: Linux shell to python Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2012-07-31 10:53 +0000
    Re: Linux shell to python 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-31 12:01 -0700
    Re: Linux shell to python 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-07-31 12:01 -0700

#26298 — Re: Linux shell to python

On 31/07/2012 02:20, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:56:48 +0000, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com>
> declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
>
>
>> Sigh, and I'm also not keen on multi-line list comprehensions, specifically
>> because I think they tend to make less readable code.  It also becomes a
>> mess when you need to insert print statements to get some visibility into
>> what's going on.
>
> 	Cleanly splitting the list-comp by
>
> 	[ result-computation
> 		for-item-selection-clause
> 		if-filter-clause ]
>
> isn't that unreadable... But anyone doing
>
> 	[ result-
> 		-computation for-item-
> 		-selection-clause if-
> 		-filter-
> 		-clause ]
>
> should be pecked to death by a dead parrot.
>

Any particular species?

-- 
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26300

On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 08:15:32 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:

> On 31/07/2012 02:20, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:56:48 +0000, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com>
>> declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
>>
>>
>>> Sigh, and I'm also not keen on multi-line list comprehensions,
>>> specifically because I think they tend to make less readable code.  It
>>> also becomes a mess when you need to insert print statements to get
>>> some visibility into what's going on.
>>
>> 	Cleanly splitting the list-comp by
>>
>> 	[ result-computation
>> 		for-item-selection-clause if-filter-clause ]
>>
>> isn't that unreadable... But anyone doing
>>
>> 	[ result-
>> 		-computation for-item- -selection-clause if- -filter-
>> 		-clause ]
>>
>> should be pecked to death by a dead parrot.
>>
>>
> Any particular species?

as has already been hinted - Norwegian Blue



-- 
Question: Is it better to abide by the rules until they're changed or
help speed the change by breaking them?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26324

Mark Lawrence於 2012年7月31日星期二UTC+8下午3時15分32秒寫道：
> On 31/07/2012 02:20, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:56:48 +0000, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com>
> 
> > declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >> Sigh, and I'm also not keen on multi-line list comprehensions, specifically
> 
> >> because I think they tend to make less readable code.  It also becomes a
> 
> >> mess when you need to insert print statements to get some visibility into
> 
> >> what's going on.
> 
> >
> 
> > 	Cleanly splitting the list-comp by
> 
> >
> 
> > 	[ result-computation
> 
> > 		for-item-selection-clause
> 
> > 		if-filter-clause ]
> 
> >
> 
> > isn't that unreadable... But anyone doing
> 
> >
> 
> > 	[ result-
> 
> > 		-computation for-item-
> 
> > 		-selection-clause if-
> 
> > 		-filter-
> 
> > 		-clause ]
> 
> >
> 
> > should be pecked to death by a dead parrot.
> 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> Any particular species?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Lawrence.

For each item in the known list that passes the required conditional test,
then  use the item to perform the tasks desired as instructed.

It is not necessary that a new list has to be constructed in the tasks.

A method which can produce a new object always involves some memory management. 
Therefore,  some error handling part should not be missing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26325

Mark Lawrence於 2012年7月31日星期二UTC+8下午3時15分32秒寫道：
> On 31/07/2012 02:20, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:56:48 +0000, Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com>
> 
> > declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> >> Sigh, and I'm also not keen on multi-line list comprehensions, specifically
> 
> >> because I think they tend to make less readable code.  It also becomes a
> 
> >> mess when you need to insert print statements to get some visibility into
> 
> >> what's going on.
> 
> >
> 
> > 	Cleanly splitting the list-comp by
> 
> >
> 
> > 	[ result-computation
> 
> > 		for-item-selection-clause
> 
> > 		if-filter-clause ]
> 
> >
> 
> > isn't that unreadable... But anyone doing
> 
> >
> 
> > 	[ result-
> 
> > 		-computation for-item-
> 
> > 		-selection-clause if-
> 
> > 		-filter-
> 
> > 		-clause ]
> 
> >
> 
> > should be pecked to death by a dead parrot.
> 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> Any particular species?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Lawrence.

For each item in the known list that passes the required conditional test,
then  use the item to perform the tasks desired as instructed.

It is not necessary that a new list has to be constructed in the tasks.

A method which can produce a new object always involves some memory management. 
Therefore,  some error handling part should not be missing.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web