On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:30:18 PM UTC+1, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 28Dec2015 01:34, Prince Udoka wrote:
> >bu i have come up with a solution, that will work but encounter a problem in
> >the set, giving set not manipulated correctly:
> >
> >def manipulate_data(kind, data):
> > if kind == 'list':
> > return list(data)[::-1]
> > elif kind == 'set':
> > return set(data)
> > elif kind == 'dictionary':
> > return dict.keys(data)
> >manipulate_data("list", range(1,6))
> >manipulate_data("set", {"a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "ANDELA", "TIA", "AFRICA"})
> >manipulate_data("dictionary", {"apples": 23, "oranges": 15, "mangoes": 3,
> >"grapes": 45})
> >
> >the thing now is the function to use in adding "ANDELA", "TIA", "AFRICA"
> >pls 4give my use of language
>
> You are very close. Let me remind you of the original task text:
>
> add items `"ANDELA"`, `"TIA"` and `"AFRICA"` to the set and return the
> resulting set
>
> Your previous attempt (with hardwired values inside the function) actually
> had
> code to do it.
>
> While you have pulled out all the hardwired values from the function (good)
> and
> put them in the external calls, note that the task explicitly says "add items
> `"ANDELA"`, `"TIA"` and `"AFRICA"` to the set". So _those_ values _are_
> supposed to be hardwired inside the function - they are a fixed part of the
> task. So move them back in, as in your previous attempt.
>
> There is some ambiguity in that part of the question: should you return a
> _new_
> set consistint of the original set plus the three new values, or simply add
> the
> three values to the original set? Your prior code modified the original set,
> which may fit the task specification.
>
> However, it is a common design objective that functions do not, _normally_,
> modify their arguments. So, consider this code:
>
> set1 = {"a", "b", "c", "d", "e"}
> set2 = manipulate_data("set", set1)
>
> After running this, set2 should look like this:
>
> {"a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "ANDELA", "TIA", "AFRICA"}
>
> (in some order -- sets are not ordered). However, what about set1? In your
> current code, set1 is modified, so it will be the same. But you can imagine
> that it would be more useful for the caller if set1 were unchanged.
>
> In python, the convention is usually that if a function returns the new value
> then it should not modify the original. So you should probably construct a
> copy
> of the original set and modify that:
>
> data = set(data)
> ... add the new values ...
> return data
>
> Cheers,
> Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au>
thumbs up Cameron , you and others here are really wonderful
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
