On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:38 PM, אלעזר <elaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is the intuition behind [1, *x, 5]? The starred expression is > replaced with a comma-separated sequence of its elements. > I've never actually used the `[1, *x, 5]` form. And therefore, of course, I've never taught it either (I teach Python for a living nowadays). I think that syntax already perhaps goes too far, actually; but I can understand it relatively easily by analogy with: a, *b, c = range(10) But the way I think about or explain either of those is "gather the extra items from the sequence." That works in both those contexts. In contrast: >>> *b = range(10) SyntaxError: starred assignment target must be in a list or tuple Since nothing was assigned to a non-unpacked variable, nothing is "extra items" in the same sense. So failure feels right to me. I understand that "convert an iterable to a list" is conceptually available for that line, but we already have `list(it)` around, so it would be redundant and slightly confusing. What seems to be wanted with `[*foo for foo in bar]` is basically just `flatten(bar)`. The latter feels like a better spelling, and the recipes in itertools docs give an implementation already (a one-liner). We do have a possibility of writing this: >>> [(*stuff,) for stuff in [range(-5,-1), range(5)]] [(-5, -4, -3, -2), (0, 1, 2, 3, 4)] That's not flattened, as it should not be. But it is very confusing to have `[(*stuff) for stuff in ...]` behave differently than that. It's much more natural—and much more explicit—to write: >>> [item for seq in [range(-5,-1), range(5)] for item in seq] [-5, -4, -3, -2, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/