Programming Forums > Script Programming > Python

hydroxide · Apr 7th, 2006, 1:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jessehk

I think some of the complicated list comprehensions are unreadable unless you've written them yourself.

Specifically the stuff I've seen Sane write...

Getting back on topic, this is my impression of Pythonic. To make a reverse() function that will return either a reversed string, tuple, or list, I wrote this:

(snip long reversefunc)

Whereas Arevos' much more elegant, and "pythonic" code looked like this:
(snip shorter reversefunc)

I think the differences are obvious :p

YMMV but I find the following more Pythonic ;-)

(Toggle Plain Text)

def reverse(x):
    return x[::-1]

for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"):
    print reverse(elem)

For me, Pythonicity is about elegance and clarity of structure and intent. Pythonic code is "pretty", as brief as it can be but not at the expense of readability, and written using Python idioms. (This is really just good coding practice for any coding language)

-T.

hydroxide · Apr 7th, 2006, 1:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master

I don't really find it readable as you think. I do understand what the code does. But the formatting is not all that great. it is better to use braclet or begin and end like ruby does. Note i am not try to say that python is not good. But the way things are written in it makes it seems as if there is there a beginning but no end such

(Toggle Plain Text)

def blah(str):
  print(str)
  while(true):
    print(str)
    if(str == Nothing):
        break
def dosomething():
   print("something")

I don't really see that as been readable

Neither do I, but then you haven't really written Python - it's like dissing Ruby for using $_, etc. The following is better (I amended the logic of your code slightly so that it would actually halt, and there would be no duplicate printing):

(Toggle Plain Text)

def blah(mystr):
    while mystr:
        print mystr
        mystr = mystr[:-1]

def dosomething():
   print "something"

Personally I loathe ruby's "end" <shrug>. I believe that emacs pymode uses #end for enforcing indentation, if you really want it.

-T.

Arevos · Apr 7th, 2006, 4:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hydroxide

YMMV but I find the following more Pythonic ;-)

I had forgotten about slices - very neat! This is exactly what I meant about using Python efficiently; hydroxide's reverse function seems a lot more efficient and easier to read than mine. If you know the language inside and out, you can program more efficiently than someone who merely knows the language well.

Dietrich · Apr 7th, 2006, 11:39 AM

I find hydroxide's example ...

(Toggle Plain Text)

def reverse(x):
    return x[::-1]

for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"):
    print reverse(elem)

... much more readable, than this even briefer version ...

(Toggle Plain Text)

for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"):
    print elem[::-1]

... the function name tells me what is going on.

I have to agree with hydroxide's statement:
Pythonicity is about elegance and clarity of structure and intent.
Pythonic code is "pretty", as brief as it can be, but not at the expense of
readability, and written using Python idioms.

Jessehk · Apr 7th, 2006, 5:24 PM

Quote:

Personally I loathe ruby's "end" <shrug>. I believe that emacs pymode uses #end for enforcing indentation, if you really want it.

hehe

I also prefer "end", as long as it's not "end for" and "end if" like in some languages.

All in all, I actually far prefer Ruby, but that's another topic entirely :p

Jessehk · Apr 7th, 2006, 6:23 PM

Arg! Edit button disappears!

I misread the post. Contrary to you opinion, I prefer Ruby's "end" to Python's forced indentation

Apr 7th, 2006, 11:39 AM	#14
Dietrich Professional Programmer Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 434 Rep Power: 4	I find hydroxide's example ... (Toggle Plain Text) def reverse(x): return x[::-1] for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"): print reverse(elem) def reverse(x): return x[::-1] for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"): print reverse(elem) ... much more readable, than this even briefer version ... (Toggle Plain Text) for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"): print elem[::-1] for elem in ([1,2,3], (1,2,3), "123"): print elem[::-1] ... the function name tells me what is going on. I have to agree with hydroxide's statement: Pythonicity is about elegance and clarity of structure and intent. Pythonic code is "pretty", as brief as it can be, but not at the expense of readability, and written using Python idioms. __________________ I looked it up on the Intergnats!

Apr 7th, 2006, 6:23 PM	#16
Jessehk The Oblivious One Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 648 Rep Power: 4	Arg! Edit button disappears! I misread the post. Contrary to you opinion, I prefer Ruby's "end" to Python's forced indentation __________________ Dr. Zoidberg: [ecstatic] I'm going to a movie... with FRIENDS!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Programming Forums > Script Programming > Python

What is your Definition of Pythonic?