assignment in a for loop

[MackS]

Hello everyone

Consider the following

l = [1,2]
for i in l: .... i = i + 1
.... l

[1, 2]

I understand (I think!) that this is due to the fact that in Python
what looks like "assignment" really is binding a name to an object. The
result is that inside the loop I am creating an object with value (i+1)
and then "pointing" the name i at it. Therefore, the object to which i
previously pointed (an element of list l) remains unchanged.

Two brief questions:

1) Is what I wrote above (minimally) correct?

2) Independently of the answer to 1, is there a way for me to assign to
elements of a list inside a loop and without resorting to C-style
ugliness of

for i in range(len(l))
l[i] = l[i] + 1

?

(Note: not using a list comprehension.)

Thanks in advance

Mack

[MackS]

Sorry, my previous post probably was not very good at explaining _why_
I want to do this.

Suppose I want to do modify all arguments which are passed to a
function. Do I need to use a list comprehension such as

def f(arg1,arg2,arg3):

arg1,arg2,arg3 = [i+1 for i in (arg1,arg2,arg3)]
...

This would be awful when, eg, one adds an argument to the function
definition. It would require edition of the code at two different
locations.

Thanks

Mack

MackS wrote:

Hello everyone

Consider the following

l = [1,2]
for i in l: ... i = i + 1
... l

[1, 2]

I understand (I think!) that this is due to the fact that in Python
what looks like "assignment" really is binding a name to an object. The
result is that inside the loop I am creating an object with value (i+1)
and then "pointing" the name i at it. Therefore, the object to which i
previously pointed (an element of list l) remains unchanged.

Two brief questions:

1) Is what I wrote above (minimally) correct?

2) Independently of the answer to 1, is there a way for me to assign to
elements of a list inside a loop and without resorting to C-style
ugliness of

for i in range(len(l))
l[i] = l[i] + 1

?

(Note: not using a list comprehension.)

Thanks in advance

Mack

[Ben Finney]

"MackS" <ma***********@hotmail.com> writes:

l = [1,2]
for i in l: ... i = i + 1
... l

[1, 2]

I understand (I think!) that this is due to the fact that in Python
what looks like "assignment" really is binding a name to an
object. The result is that inside the loop I am creating an object
with value (i+1) and then "pointing" the name i at it. Therefore,
the object to which i previously pointed (an element of list l)
remains unchanged.

That's a fair explanation, yes.
Two brief questions:

1) Is what I wrote above (minimally) correct?
Correct for what? You can tell if it's *syntactically* correct by
simply running it.

As for any other "correct", define that. Does it do what you want it
to do?
2) Independently of the answer to 1, is there a way for me to assign
to elements of a list inside a loop and without resorting to C-style
ugliness of

for i in range(len(l))
l[i] = l[i] + 1
You can build a new list from your operations on the old one.

new_list = []
for x in old_list:
new_list.append(x+1)

You can also do it more succinctly with a list comprehension
expression.
(Note: not using a list comprehension.)

What's preventing the use of list comprehensions?

new_list = [x+1 for x in old_list]

--
\ "Smoking cures weight problems. Eventually." -- Steven Wright |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Ben Finney]

"MackS" <ma***********@hotmail.com> writes:

[MackS, please don't top-post.]

Suppose I want to do modify all arguments which are passed to a
function. Do I need to use a list comprehension such as

def f(arg1,arg2,arg3):

arg1,arg2,arg3 = [i+1 for i in (arg1,arg2,arg3)]
...

This would be awful when, eg, one adds an argument to the function
definition. It would require edition of the code at two different
locations.

If you anticipate increasing the number of values passed to the
function, and you're doing the same operation on all of them, why not
pass in a list::

def add_one_to_each(nums): ... """ Makes a new list with each value incremented by one. """
...
... incremented_nums = [x+1 for x in nums]
... return incremented_nums
... foo = [3, 5, 8]
bar = add_one_to_each(foo)
bar

[4, 6, 9]

--
\ "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather |
`\ straps." -- Emo Philips |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[MackS]

Thank you for your reply.

1) Is what I wrote above (minimally) correct?
Correct for what? You can tell if it's *syntactically* correct by
simply running it.

As for any other "correct", define that. Does it do what you want it
to do?

I was referring to my attempted explanation, not the code snippet.
[...]

What's preventing the use of list comprehensions?

new_list = [x+1 for x in old_list]

Suppose I want to do anything as trivial as modify the values of the
list members _and_ print their new values. List comprehensions must not
contain statements, I think.
Mack

[Ben Finney]

"MackS" <ma***********@hotmail.com> writes:

Thank you for your reply.

A pleasure to help.

What's preventing the use of list comprehensions?

new_list = [x+1 for x in old_list]

Suppose I want to do anything as trivial as modify the values of the
list members _and_ print their new values. List comprehensions must
not contain statements, I think.

You're correct, but that's because you're creating a new list, not
modifying the existing one. The list comprehension can do anything you
like to generate each element, so long as it's an expression::

foo = [3, 5, 8]
print [x+1 for x in foo] [4, 6, 9] print [x**2 for x in foo] [9, 25, 64] print [str(x**2) for x in foo] ['9', '25', '64'] print [len(str(x**2)) for x in foo] [1, 2, 2]

If it's too complex to be readable in a single expression, make it a
function which returns a value, since calling a function is itself an
expression::
def get_result_of_complex_stuff(n): ... quad = n**4
... if len(str(quad)) % 2:
... word = "spam"
... else:
... word = "eggs"
... result = word.strip("s").title()
... return result
... foo = [3, 5, 8]
print [get_result_of_complex_stuff(x) for x in foo] ['Egg', 'Pam', 'Egg']

Once you have your new list being created by a list comprehension, do
what you like with it. If you want it to be stored, assigned back to
the original name, each value printed, or whatever you like, then do
so::
bar = [get_result_of_complex_stuff(x) for x in foo]
foo = bar
for x in foo:

... print x,
...
Egg Pam Egg

--
\ "One time a cop pulled me over for running a stop sign. He |
`\ said, 'Didn't you see the stop sign?' I said, 'Yeah, but I |
_o__) don't believe everything I read.'" -- Steven Wright |
Ben Finney

[bruno at modulix]

MackS wrote:
(snip)

What's preventing the use of list comprehensions?

new_list = [x+1 for x in old_list]
Suppose I want to do anything as trivial as modify the values of the
list members _and_ print their new values.

Then it's a sure design smell IMHO. Don't mix presentation with logic.
List comprehensions must not
contain statements, I think.

You're right.

--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in 'o****@xiludom.gro'.split('@')])"