On Dec 19, 1:46 am, "Frank Millman" <fr...@chagford.com> wrote: > "Steven D'Aprano" <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote in message > > news:4eeea8eb$0$11091$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com... > > > On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 18:35:47 -0800, alex23 wrote: > > >> Pre-namedtuple, I used to like using named slices for this: > > >> cPID = slice(19) > >> pid = recs[cPID] > > > You know, that is an incredibly simple thing and yet it never dawned on > > me before now. Thank you for sharing that. > > I also like it, but it does not work quite so simply for me. > > >>> row = tuple(range(20)) > >>> cPID = slice(15) > >>> pid = row[cPID] > >>> pid > > (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14) > > > > This works - > > > > >>> row = tuple(range(20)) > >>> cPID = slice(15, 16) > >>> pid, = row[cPID] # note the trailing comma > >>> pid > 15 > > Still nice, but not quite so elegant. > > Am I missing something? > > Frank Millman
if you're going to do: > >>> cPID = slice(15, 16) > >>> pid, = row[cPID] # note the trailing comma Why not just: >>>row = tuple(range(20)) >>>cPID = 15 # a proposed constant >>>pid = row[cPID] >>>pid 15 It might be better for other's to debug if you use >>> pid, _ = row[cPID] as a little tiny comma like that is easy to miss in some text editors. Not everyone has large LCD screens. Not that I like the "_" for this purpose. Personally I'd love to see the "_" used instead of "self" as a common practice (useful when you use lots of "self...." on a line). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
