Hello everyone, I've got a little issue, both programming and performance-wise. I have a set, containing objects that refer to other sets. For example, in a simple notation: (<a, b, c>, <d, e>) (or in a more object-like display: set(obj1.choices=set(a, b, c) ). There may be obj1..objN objects in the outer set, and the amount of items in the choices sets could also reach a high number. The objects in the choices sets might overlap.
Now I want to have all possible combinations, like this: (a, d), (b, d), (c, d), (a, e), (b, e), (c, e). However, I've got a few catches that make an already (icky) recursive function worse to use. First of all, I want to be able to only choose things so that the outer 'result sets' have the same length. For example, if you'd have (<a, b>, <a, c>), you might pick (a, a) with a simple algorythm, the basic behaviour of sets reducing it to (a) and thus having an improper length. I could add yet another loop after calculating everything to throw out any result sets with the improper length, but that would be highly inefficient. Second, I'd hope to be able to say that objX should be assumed to have made the choice z. In the first example I mentioned, if I said that 'obj1 == a', the only result sets that would come out would be (a, d) and (a, e). I've been toying with this problem for a while, but I've found out it quickly gets slow, so I hope some people here could find a way to write code like this that is efficient (and hopefully not rely on recursion and 'fix up' loops like I've got mockups with right now). Thank you for any suggestions you can offer. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
