RetroSearch Browse

Wed Oct 22 12:23:43 EDT 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039294.html

In article <16278.34154.245725.959203 at montanaro.dyndns.org>,
 Skip Montanaro <skip at pobox.com> wrote:
[ re a long expression of mine ]
... 
>     pos2d = dict([(s,(positions[s][0]+dx*positions[s][2],
>                       positions[s][1]+dy*positions[s][2]))
>                      for s in positions])
...
>     pos2d = {s: (positions[s][0]+dx*positions[s][2],
>                  positions[s][1]+dy*positions[s][2])
>                 for s in positions}
> 
> The extra characters required today are less of a problem if the expression
> is laid out sensibly.

I have to admit, your indentation is better than mine, even if you 
ignore the problems caused by my using lines wider than 80 characters.  
But I still feel the second of your two alternatives more clearly 
expresses the intent of the expression.

-- 
David Eppstein                      http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/
Univ. of California, Irvine, School of Information & Computer Science

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039294.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: accumulator display syntax