> I feel like I should be honest about something else - I'm always a
> little bit confused by the ordering for comprehensions involving
> multiple clauses. For me, it's the fact that:
> [[a for a in b] for b in ['uvw', 'xyz']] == [['u', 'v', 'w'], ['x', 'y',
> 'z']]
> which makes me want to write:
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Not everything is a function. What's your point?
>
> As far as I can see, in *every* other use of sequence unpacking, *t is
> conceptually replaced by a comma-separated sequence of items from t. If
> the starred item
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Not everything is a function. What's your point?
>
> As far as I can see, in *every* other use of sequence unpacking, *t is
> conceptually replaced by a comma-separated sequence of items from t. If
> the starred item
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Oh look, just like now:
>
> py> iterable = [(1, 'a'), (2, 'b')]
> py> [(100, *t) for t in iterable]
> [(100, 1, 'a'), (100, 2, 'b')]
>
> Hands up anyone who expected to flatten the iterable and get
>
> [100, 1,
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 04:34:49PM +0200, Martti Kühne wrote:
>
>> > If I had seen a list comprehension with an unpacked loop variable:
>> >
>> > [t for t in [(1, 'a'), (2, '
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> is the same as
>
> [ x for var in iterable for x in expression ]
>
correction, that would be:
[var for expression in iterable for var in expression]
you are right, though. List comprehensions are already stackable.
TIL.