Ka-Ping Yee wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Jul 2000, Peter Schneider-Kamp wrote: > > +1 on this. no performance hit (probably a small gain), > > "zip" is imho the right name (see e.g. haskell). > > Indeed, a nice coincidence. :) off-topic: I am still thinking about higher order functions in Python: e.g.: map(+ 1, [1, 2, 3]) instead of map(lambda x: x + 1, [1, 2, 3]) don't have a clue how to do that yet. > Alas, the vertical bar is already a bitwise-or operator, and > couldn't safely be placed next to the <expr>. [...] > Semicolon might be worth considering here, actually: [f(x); for x in l] Better than just a comma anyway. Okay for me. > [(x, y), for x in list1, if x > 1, for y in list2, if y > 2] [...] > The first would produce [(2, 3), (3, 3)], and the second would > It would have to be written: > > [(x, y, z), for x in l1, for y in l2, for z in l3] but that's loosing some of it's beauty for me. if we'd use the semicolon [ x, y, z; for x in l1, for y in l2, for z in l3] looks better to me. okay, really heading off to work now, Peter -- Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331 Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de
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