On 11/14/05, Ben Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hijacking Brian's response since my newsserver never god Ben's original
request...:
I would program this at a reasonably high abstraction level, based on
sets -- since you say order doesn't matter, sets are more appropriate
than lists anyway. For example:
def two_cont_in_common(x, y):
common = set(x).intersection(y)
return bool(common.intersection (z+1 for z in common))
i.e., given two lists or whatever, first build the set of all elements
they have in common, then check if that set contains two continuous
elements. Then, as Brian suggests, you can use this dyadic function on
a reference list and as many others as you wish:
def bens_task(reference, others):
return [two_cont_in_common(alist, reference) for alist in others]
The call bens_task(lisA, lisB, lisC, lisD) will give you essentially
what you require, except it uses True and False rather than 1 and 0; if
you need to fix this last issue, you can add an int(...) call around
these booleans in either of the functions in question.
AlexI got invalid syntax error when i run Alex's code. do not know why.
Alex,
I use PythonWin to run:
def two_cont_in_common(x, y):
common = set(x).intersection(y)
return bool(common.intersection(z+1 for z in common))
def bens_task(reference, others):
return [two_cont_in_common(alist, reference) for alist in others]
common = set(x).intersection(y)
return bool(common.intersection(z+1 for z in common))
def bens_task(reference, others):
return [two_cont_in_common(alist, reference) for alist in others]
I got invalid syntax error and the mouse's cursor stay on the 'for' in the statement of
return bool(common.intersection(z+1 for z in common))
--
Thanks!
Ben Bush
return bool(common.intersection(z+1 for z in common))
--
Thanks!
Ben Bush
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
