On 11 Jun 2013 07:47, "Peter Otten" <__pete...@web.de> wrote: > > Fábio Santos wrote: > > > On 10 Jun 2013 23:54, "Roel Schroeven" <r...@roelschroeven.net> wrote: > >> > >> You could do something like: > >> > >> new_songs, old_songs = [], [] > >> [(new_songs if s.is_new() else old_songs).append(s) for s in songs] > >> > >> But I'm not sure that that's any better than the long version. > > > > This is so beautiful! > > It makes me cringe. > > This code does spurious work to turn what is naturally written as a for loop > into a list comprehension that is thrown away immediately. I think I'd even > prefer this "gem" > > >>> evens = [] > >>> odds = [item for item in range(10) if item % 2 or evens.append(item)] > >>> evens, odds > ([0, 2, 4, 6, 8], [1, 3, 5, 7, 9]) > > but if I have my way every side effect in a list comprehension should be > punished with an extra hour of bug-hunting ;) >
What I like so much about it is the .. if .. else .. Within the parenthesis and the append() call outside these parenthesis. I agree it would be best written as a for loop, to increase readability and avoid confusion. I always expect list comprehensions to be used as expressions, and its use as a (single-expression) statement is rather odd. On 11 Jun 2013 07:52, "Jonas Geiregat" <jo...@geiregat.org> wrote: > I must disagree , this is unreadable and in my honor opinion not Pythonic at all. > I've learned it's always better to be explicit then implicit, and this snippet of code does a lot in an implicit way. > (Read above)
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
