Duncan Booth wrote:
> Boris Borcic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It is more elementary in the mathematician's sense, and therefore
>> preferable all other things being equal, imo. I've tried to split
>> 'gen' but I can't say the result is so much better.
>>
>> def flattendict(d) :
>> gen = lambda L : (x for M in exp(L) for x in rec(M))
>> exp = lambda L : (L+list(kv) for kv in L.pop().iteritems())
>> rec = lambda M : gen(M) if isinstance(M[-1],dict) else [M]
>> return dict((tuple(L[:-1]),L[-1]) for L in gen([d]))
>
> Why, why, why, why are you using lambda here?
Because the 3 lambdas make manifest that they could be combined into a single
expression and thus reveal that they replace a single expression.
> It only makes the code harder
> to read
Matter of perceptions. I myself tend to find
def g(...) :
def f(x) :
return (whatever)
return y(f)
a bit hard to follow. So frankly I don't feel it betters anything to write
def flattendict(d) :
def gen(L) :
return (x for M in exp(L) for x in rec(M))
def exp(L) :
return (L+list(kv) for kv in L.pop().iteritems())
def rec(M) :
return gen(M) if isinstance(M[-1],dict) else [M]
return dict((tuple(L[:-1]),L[-1]) for L in gen([d]))
But whatever to please you
Cheers, BB
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
