On Wed, 11 May 2011 13:50:54 -0400, Prasad, Ramit <ramit.pra...@jpmchase.com> wrote: : I find this argument to be flawed. Should I stop using built-in : generators instead of range/xrange for looping through lists? : Certainly for loops with loop counting are understood more widely : than generators. Should I stop using any advanced feature Python : because it is difficult to understand without knowing Python?
No; I'd suggest the most legible and intuitive construct that /does/ the job. Never something which requires one extra (illegible) page to do the job, or something which does not do the job at all. : I may not have made the point well, but I cannot see any advantage : for trying to program for the lowest common denominator. Common to what? I'd try the lowest common denominator of legibility and effictiveness. It is just KISS. -- :-- Hans Georg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
