RetroSearch Browse

Sat Sep 3 03:45:57 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056080.html

On 9/2/05, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> At 11:02 AM 9/3/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >Printing the items in a sequence also becomes straightforward:
> >
> >print " ".join(map(str, range(10))) => output(*range(10))
> >
> >Playing well with generator expressions comes for free, too:
> >
> >print " ".join(str(x*x) for x in range(10))
> >      => output(*(x*x for x in range(10)))
> 
> An implementation issue: that generator expression will get expanded into a
> tuple, so you shouldn't use that for outputting large sequences.

Then how about::

  output(*(x*x for x in range(10)), iter=1)

Where all given iterable parameters are automatically iterated?

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056080.html below:

[Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0