On Mar 8, 6:24 pm, rockingred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it's a bad practice to get into. Did you intend to do the > "process" step again over the added variables? If not I would set a > new variable, based on your awful naming convention, let's call it z. > Then use z.append(y) within the for loop and after you are out of your > for loop, q.append(z).
Thanks, rockingred, for the advice. I hope that you didn't assume that I was a newbie, even if my question looks so. What I was trying to do is write some Python code which I need to optimize as much as possible. I am using Cython (Pyrex) and would probably end up rewriting my whole module in C at one point, but it is really hard to beat Python data structures at their home turf. So meanwhile, I am making use of dubious optimizations - on my own responsibility. There have been a lot of these along the years - like using variables leaking from list expressions (not anymore). Think of it as a goto. Yes, I intend to do the process step again over the added variables. The suggested deque is probably the best, though I need the speed here. What are the variable naming you would suggest, for a throwaway - probably anonymized for the same of publishing on the web - code? Cheers, Muhammad Alkarouri -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
