Got the main idea. Still need to "chew it up" in depth. (As I mentioned I'm a beginner.... EE student, so please excuse me for my "lameness" ^_^)
-----Original Message----- From: Python-list [mailto:python-list-bounces+webmailgroups=gmail....@python.org] On Behalf Of Rustom Mody Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 18:46 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Comprehension with two variables - explanation needed On Sunday, November 23, 2014 9:27:22 PM UTC+5:30, Roy Smith wrote: > Skip Montanaro wrote: > > > > But it breaks all the picture that I've built in my head about > > > comps till now... > > > > Note that list comprehensions are little more than syntactic sugar > > for for loops. If you're having terrible writing or understanding > > one, especially a compound one like your example, it can help to > > write it as a (nested) for loop, then covert it (perhaps incrementally) to the list comp form. > > Or not. If it was complicated enough that you needed to loopify it to > understand what it's doing, have pity on the next person who has to > maintain your code and leave it as a loop :-) > > My general rule for code hygiene is, "If I have to think about whether > something is too complicated, it is". [I guess I am in the minority here... anyways... here goes] 1. I find comprehensions are harder than for-loops -- corollary to functional code is easier than imperative -- corollary to time is a major headache. If the problem does not involve time the solution should try to avoid it 2. "List comprehensions are syntactic sugar for for loops" Cannot technically quarrel with that as that is the position of the official docs. However to me it puts the cart before the horse. Its like saying that def foo(x): return x+1 is just the same as 0 LOAD_FAST 0 (x) 3 LOAD_CONST 1 (1) 6 BINARY_ADD 7 RETURN_VALUE (output of dis) That may be the case but it seems (to me at least) to defeat the purpose of using an hi-level language. 3. So how should one think of list comprehensions? As a python/executable version of 'set-builder notation' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set-builder_notation 4. Finally to the OP (assuming you wanted a prime-number generator) Heres a solution for your consideration. First a one-line solution in haskell sieve (p:xs) = p:sieve [x | x <- xs, x `mod` p /= 0] Call with sieve [2..] Now a pythonification of that def n2s(): # natural nos from 2; ie [2..] i=2 while True: yield i i+=1 def sieve(l): p = next(l) yield p yield from sieve (x for x in l if x % p != 0) Call as for p in sieve(n2s()): print(p) -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
