Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> Boris Borcic a écrit :
>> Hello Bruno,
>>
>> Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
>>
>>> Boris Borcic wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Do you have any ideas?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> you could use a recursive generator, like
>>>>
>>>> def genAllChildren(self) :
>>>> for child in self.children :
>>>> yield child
>>>> for childchild in child.genAllChildren() :
>>>> yield childchild
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Or how to *not* address the real problem...
>>>
>>> Boris, using a generator may be a pretty good idea, but *not* as a way
>>> to solve a problem that happens to be a FAQ !-)
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, but I don't understand your reasoning.
>
> It's quite simple. The OP's problem is well-known (it's a FAQ),
This is really an oversimplification. What's the case is that his showstopper
was covered by the FAQ list. The OP's "problem" is actually a stack of
problems/subproblems and was presented as such.
> and easy
> to solve.
I did consider a couple distinct ways to solve "it" while passing lists around
-
did you notice that the OP's code made no clear choice as to whether it wanted
to pass them by reference or as return values ? That's how a generator struck
me
as most pythonic if you want ("In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation
to guess").
> The righ answer to it is obviously to give a link to the FAQ
> (or take time to re-explain it for the zillionth time), not to propose a
> workaround.
Given your usage of code simplicity in another thread as (roughly) a measure of
pythonic virtue, I feel it warranted to ask why should one recognize simpler
code as "the workaround" (assuming it fits the bill) ?
Because it doesn't cross the FAQ, seems to be your answer...
>
>> How can you exclude that the OP /may/ find that a generator neatly
>> solves his problem ?
>
> I don't exclude it, and explicitly mentioned in whole letters that, I
> quote, it "may be a pretty good idea". And actually, the OP's problem is
> really with default values evaluation scheme - something that every
> Python programmer should know, because there are cases where you cannot
> solve it with a generator-based solution !-)
...
>> - and the quirks of default values being FAQ stuff don't change that.
>> Sure if nobody had covered that aspect, but a couple other posters did...
>
> Yes, but you forgot to mention that - and I would not have post any
> comment on your solution if you had explicitly mentioned the FAQ or
> these other answers.
At this point I recognize that our difference may very well have deep roots
relating to cognitive style, educational policy, etc. Generally speaking I
welcome debate on such premisses as an occasion to learn more (not so much from
my contradictor than from the debate itself), but a precondition is that the
partner/contradictor understands my motive (what I can't count on since the
idea
of learning from the debate itself is pretty typical such cognitive style
divides). Besides, I don't quite have the time right now.
The short form is : "I strongly disagree with you".
Best, BB
--
"On naît tous les mètres du même monde"
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
