Dustan wrote: > Robert Kern wrote: >> Dustan wrote: >>> Fredrik Lundh wrote: >>>> if you care about writing robust code, why not just use a for-loop, >>>> and the list extend method? >>> Because I'm embedding this expression in a list comprehension (as I >>> stated in my original post), and last time I checked, it's not possible >>> to treat a for-loop as an expression (which is what a list >>> comprehension requires). >> As with all such things, you stick the implementation in a well-named >> function >> and simply call the function everywhere. The implementation never needs to >> be a >> one-liner expression. > > It's already in a function, but in order to convert the reduce function > into a for-loop that I can use as an expression, I would have to create > another independent function, which would make that code more cluttered > than it already is. > > Unless you're saying to perform the list comprehension manually. That > would be two for-loops I use in the list comprehension, plus another > one to take place of the reduce function. Sure, that spreads out each > individual step a little more, but it also makes it more difficult to > understand what the overall goal of the code is (I'm going for > readability as well as easy maintenance here).
Let's just say that we disagree entirely on what constitutes readability and maintainability. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
