Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> writes: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:19:41 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > > "Jon P." <jbpe...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> I'd like to do: > >> > >> resultlist = operandlist1 + operandlist2 > > > > That's an unfortunate way of expressing it; it's valid Python syntax > > that doesn't do what you're describing (in this case, it will bind > > ‘resultlist’ to a new list that is the *concatenation* of the two > > original lists). > > True, but it is valid mathematical syntax if you interpret lists as > vectors. I'm sure there are languages where [1,2]+[3,4] will return > [4,6]. Possibly R or Mathematica?
Python isn't one of them, which is why I cautioned strongly against presenting it that way in this forum. > Everyone forgets the multiple argument form of map. > > map(func, s1, s2, s3, ...) > > would need to be written as: > > [func(t) for f in itertools.izip_longest(s1, s2, s3, ...)] > > which I guess is relatively simple, but only because izip_longest() does > the hard work. Yes, I would call that equivalently simple. (I also find it more explicit and hence readable.) -- \ “Laurie got offended that I used the word ‘puke’. But to me, | `\ that's what her dinner tasted like.” —Jack Handey | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
