> > > > On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Greg Wilson wrote:
> > > > Based on my very-informal survey, if:
> > > > for i in someList:
> > > > works, then many people will assume that:
> > > > for i in someDict:
> > > > will also work, and yield values.
> > > Ka-Ping Yee:
> > > ...the latter is ambiguous (keys or values?)...
> > Greg Wilson
> > The latter is exactly as ambiguous as the former... I think this
> > is a case where your (intimate) familiarity with the way Python
> > works now is preventing you from getting into newbie headspace...
> Ka-Ping Yee:
> No, i don't think so. It seems quite possible to argue from first
> principles that if you ask to iterate over things "in" a sequence,
> you clearly want the items in the sequence, not their integer indices.
Greg Wilson:
Well, arguing from first principles, Aristotle was able to demonstrate that
heavy objects fall faster than light ones :-). I'm basing my claim on the kind
of errors students in my course make. Even after being shown half-a-dozen
examples of Python for loops, many of them write:
for i in someSequence:
print someSequence[i]
in their first exercise.
Thanks,
Greg
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