On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:10 PM, <python-list-requ...@python.org> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu>
> To: python-l...@python.org
> Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:09:23 -0400
> Subject: Re: Generator expressions vs. comprehensions
> On 5/25/2010 3:08 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
>>
>> Michele Simionato wrote:
>
>> I think not turning the list-comp into syntactic sugar for list(genexp) in
>> py3 is a missed opportunity.
>
> Implementing it that way was tried but was much slower than the current
> implementation. If one uses StopIteration as it is intended to be used (and
> is so documented), then, I believe, they are equivalent. There was a
> conscious decision to not slow comprehensions for the many to cater to the
> very few.
I thought that I was using it as intended. The full function that I
was working with when I ran into the problem was:
def tuples(iterable, n=2):
"""Make an iterator that returns elements from iterable in tuples of n. If
the number of elements from the iterable is not a multiple of n, any
trailing elements will be truncated.
tuples('ABCDEFG', n=2) --> ('A', 'B') ('C', 'D') ('E', 'F')
"""
iterator = iter(iterable)
while True:
yield tuple(iterator.next() for i in xrange(n))
The intention being that if iterator.next() raised a StopIteration, it
would propagate out and signal no further values for the tuples
generator. Instead, the generator expression results in empty tuples
once the iterator has run out, and the tuples generator never runs
out. This has since been fixed by replacing the generator expression
with a for loop, but if you don't mind my asking, how does this
violate the documented usage pattern? Is the recommendation to use an
explicit try-except around every call of iterator.next()?
Off-topic, does anybody know of a better name for this function?
Cheers,
Ian
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
