Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> What do you think the following code would print?
May I answer this? :-)
>
> for i in (10, 20, 30); j in (1, 2, 3):
> print i+j
>
> A.
>
> 11
> 22
> 33
>
> B.
> 11
> 12
> 13
> 21
> 22
> 23
> 31
> 32
> 33
>
> I'm afraid the answer will be the same, if these are again numerical
> analysts -- these people live by nested DO loops. :-(
Without being a numerical analyst, I would respond B.
That's what this syntax suggests to me.
Someone proposed `for ... while ...' which clearly suggests something
different than nested loops, and in that case, if I don't know what it
is, I'll read the docs.
--
Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4