Dick Moores wrote: > At 06:47 AM 8/14/2007, Kent Johnson wrote: >> This could be a list comprehension: >> d = [ [k, 0] for k in range(200) ] > > So you recommend using list comprehensions wherever possible? (I sure > wouldn't have thought of that one..)
Not "whenever possible", no, but I find simple list comps (I count this one as simple) to be far more readable than the equivalent loop. Not only are they shorter but they read the way I think. If the list comp can't be easily written on one line, or has a complex condition, or has two for clauses, I find it less appealing and may write it as a for loop. I never use a list comp just for the side-effects; only when I actually want the list. > I prefer the index (or integer) to come after the bar ends, and before > the count. One reason is that if the index is at the base of the bar, at > 100 and above, the bars get pushed out one character longer than they > should be relative to the 99 or less bars. I suppose there's a way to > handle this, but I couldn't think of it then (but see below). Use string formatting or str.rjust(): In [1]: '%3d' % 10 Out[1]: ' 10' In [2]: '%3d' % 100 Out[2]: '100' In [4]: str(10).rjust(3) Out[4]: ' 10' > This would solve the problem I mentioned above caused by putting the > indices at the bases of the bars: > > for i, count in enumerate(d): > barLength = count//barLengthAdjuster > if i < 100: > print "%d %s %d" % (i, '*' * barLength, count) # there are 2 > spaces between %d and %s > else: > print "%d %s %d" % (i, '*' * barLength, count) Ouch. See above. Kent _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
