P: n/a

Hi,
I am trying to understand the following line:
# a is an integer array
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
Can you please tell me what that means,
I think sum(a[j:i] means find the some from a[j] to a[i]
But what is the meaning of the part (j,i)?  
Share this Question
P: n/a

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:41 PM, si***************@gmail.com
<si***************@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
I am trying to understand the following line:
# a is an integer array
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
This code isn't valid. You have a [ with no closing ].
Cheers,
Chris

Follow the path of the Iguana... http://rebertia.com
>
Can you please tell me what that means,
I think sum(a[j:i] means find the some from a[j] to a[i]
But what is the meaning of the part (j,i)?
 http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonlist  
P: n/a

On Nov 16, 3:41*pm, "silverburgh.me...@gmail.com"
<silverburgh.me...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
I am trying to understand the following line:
# a is an integer array
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
Can you please tell me what that means,
I think sum(a[j:i] means find the some from a[j] to a[i]
But what is the meaning of the part (j,i)?
0. "integer array" is a very loose term in Python. Fortunately the
answer to your question is not affected by that.
1. Sorry, the max... line is not syntactically correct; there are two
[s and only one ]; there are 4 (s and only 3 )s. Try copying the line
and pasting, not retyping.
2. I'm not going to try to guess how to fix the bracket mismatches.
3. Note that you have left off a ) from your question about "sum" ...
it probably should be sum([j:i]).
4. That is the sum (not "some"!!) of a[j] to a[i1] both inclusive.
It's a standard idiom in Python for the end of a range to be expressed
as the first unused element.
5. Even after fixing the bracket mismatches, it looks like you will
have an expression whose value is thrown away. Perhaps you might like
to give us a few lines of context before and after the line of
interest.  
P: n/a

This is the full source code:
def A(w, v, i,j):
if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
if w[i1] j: return A(w, v, i1, j)
if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
I am reading this blog http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Chris Rebert <cl*@rebertia.comwrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:41 PM, si***************@gmail.com
<si***************@gmail.comwrote:
>Hi,
I am trying to understand the following line: # a is an integer array
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
This code isn't valid. You have a [ with no closing ].
Cheers,
Chris

Follow the path of the Iguana... http://rebertia.com
>> Can you please tell me what that means, I think sum(a[j:i] means find the some from a[j] to a[i] But what is the meaning of the part (j,i)?
 http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonlist  
P: n/a

See below.
On Nov 15, 11:15*pm, "Meryl Silverburgh" <silverburgh.me...@gmail.com>
wrote:
This is the full source code:
def A(w, v, i,j):
* * if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
* * if w[i1] j: *return A(w, v, i1, j)
* * if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1,j  w[i1]))
I am reading this blog
http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Chris Rebert <c...@rebertia.comwrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:41 PM, silverburgh.me...@gmail.com
<silverburgh.me...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
I am trying to understand the following line:
# a is an integer array
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
This code isn't valid. You have a [ with no closing ].
Cheers,
Chris

Follow the path of the Iguana... http://rebertia.com
Can you please tell me what that means,
I think sum(a[j:i] means find the some from a[j] to a[i]
But what is the meaning of the part (j,i)?
 http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonlist
if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j w[i1]))
This means:
Calculate 'A(w,v, i1, j)', calculate 'v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j  w
[i1])', and return whichever is larger.  
P: n/a

silverburgh:
max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i))
Other people have already answered you so I'll add only a small note:
today the max() function has a key optional attribute, so that code
can also be written as:
max(((j, i) for ...), key=lambda (j, i): sum(a[j : i]))
I think you have copied that part from code that runs in O(n^2);
remember that you can find the max subarray with a well known O(n)
algorithm too.
Bye,
bearophile  
P: n/a

On Nov 16, 4:15*pm, "Meryl Silverburgh" <silverburgh.me...@gmail.com>
wrote:
This is the full source code:
def A(w, v, i,j):
* * if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
* * if w[i1] j: *return A(w, v, i1, j)
* * if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1,j  w[i1]))
Huh??? There is only a very slight resemblance to the code that you
posted previously ... both contain 'max, 'i', and 'j'
I am reading this blog
http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
I suggest that you don't bother reading a blog written by somebody who
(presumably consciously) keyed in that "if w[i1] <= j: " above.
Oh, very interesting, it contains:
def msum(a):
return max([(sum(a[j:i]), (j,i)) for i in range(1,len(a)+1) for j
in range(i)])
Would you care to tell us which part of which function you are now
trying to understand?  
P: n/a

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:50:16 0800, John Machin wrote:
def A(w, v, i,j):
Â* Â* if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
Â* Â* if w[i1] j: Â*return A(w, v, i1, j)
Â* Â* if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] +
A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
>I am reading this blog
http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
I suggest that you don't bother reading a blog written by somebody who
(presumably consciously) keyed in that "if w[i1] <= j: " above.
That is a translation of standard terminology for a hybrid function.
Mathematics doesn't have an "else", so you write hybrid functions by
enumerating each branch as an if.
While it's not especially good Python technique, it's a perfectly
idiomatic mathematical expression, and shouldn't be the basis for
dismissing an entire blog.

Steven  
P: n/a

On Nov 16, 9:31*pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVETHIS
cybersource.com.auwrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:50:16 0800, John Machin wrote:
def A(w, v, i,j):
* * if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
* * if w[i1] j: *return A(w, v, i1, j)
* * if w[i1] <= j: return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] +
* * * A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
I am reading this blog
>http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
I suggest that you don't bother reading a blog written by somebody who
(presumably consciously) keyed in that "if w[i1] <= j: " above.
That is a translation of standard terminology for a hybrid function.
Mathematics doesn't have an "else", so you write hybrid functions by
enumerating each branch as an if.
An else is not required.
if w[i1] j:
return A(w, v, i1, j)
return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
While it's not especially good Python technique, it's a perfectly
idiomatic mathematical expression, and shouldn't be the basis for
dismissing an entire blog.
He's meant to be writing Python code, not mathematical expressions.  
P: n/a

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:41:03 0800, John Machin wrote:
On Nov 16, 9:31Â*pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVETHIS
cybersource.com.auwrote:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:50:16 0800, John Machin wrote:
def A(w, v, i,j):
Â* Â* if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
Â* Â* if w[i1] j: Â*return A(w, v, i1, j) if w[i1] <= j: return
Â* Â* max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] +
Â* Â* Â* A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1])) I am reading this blog
>>http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
I suggest that you don't bother reading a blog written by somebody
who (presumably consciously) keyed in that "if w[i1] <= j: " above.
That is a translation of standard terminology for a hybrid function. Mathematics doesn't have an "else", so you write hybrid functions by enumerating each branch as an if.
An else is not required.
if w[i1] j:
return A(w, v, i1, j)
return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
Which is also not valid terminology for hybrid functions.
>While it's not especially good Python technique, it's a perfectly idiomatic mathematical expression, and shouldn't be the basis for dismissing an entire blog.
He's meant to be writing Python code, not mathematical expressions.
And he's written Python code. Perfectly valid Python code. Just because
it is not what you consider to be idiomatic Python code isn't a good
reason to dismiss his entire blog.
What you've done is rather like me saying that because you failed to use
a colon after "required", and therefore haven't written what *I* consider
good English style, not only is your specific post best avoided, but
*all* your posts should be avoided. I trust you understand the logical
fallacy I would be making, which you have already made. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_o...stance_fallacy

Steven
and now begins the arguments as to whether it is a fallacy, and if so, if
it is the fallacy I have said it is...  
P: n/a

On Nov 16, 11:04*pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVETHIS
cybersource.com.auwrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:41:03 0800, John Machin wrote:
On Nov 16, 9:31*pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVETHIS
cybersource.com.auwrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:50:16 0800, John Machin wrote:
def A(w, v, i,j):
* * if i == 0 or j == 0: return 0
* * if w[i1] j: *return A(w, v, i1, j) if w[i1] <= j:return
* * max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] +
* * * A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
I am reading this blog
>http://20bits.com/articles/introduct...cprogramming/
I suggest that you don't bother reading a blog written by somebody
who (presumably consciously) keyed in that "if w[i1] <= j: " above.
That is a translation of standard terminology for a hybrid function.
Mathematics doesn't have an "else", so you write hybrid functions by
enumerating each branch as an if.
An else is not required.
* * if w[i1] j:
* * * *return A(w, v, i1, j)
* * return max(A(w,v, i1, j), v[i1] + A(w,v, i1, j  w[i1]))
Which is also not valid terminology for hybrid functions.
I couldn't care less. It's valid and efficient (compared to the
original) Python.
While it's not especially good Python technique, it's a perfectly
idiomatic mathematical expression, and shouldn't be the basis for
dismissing an entire blog.
He's meant to be writing Python code, not mathematical expressions.
And he's written Python code. Perfectly valid Python code. Just because
it is not what you consider to be idiomatic Python code isn't a good
reason to dismiss his entire blog.
What you've done is rather like me saying that because you failed to use
a colon after "required", and therefore haven't written what *I* consider
good English style, not only is your specific post best avoided, but
*all* your posts should be avoided. I trust you understand the logical
fallacy I would be making, which you have already made.
Nothing to do with style. It was the screaming inefficiency of:
if non_trivial_condition: return x
if not non_trivial_condition: return y
that fired me up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_o...stance_fallacy
Quoted Wikipedia instant disqualification you lose. Good night.  
P: n/a

On Nov 16, 7:34*am, John Machin <sjmac...@lexicon.netwrote:
On Nov 16, 11:04*pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVETHIS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_o...stance_fallacy
Quoted Wikipedia instant disqualification you lose. Good night.
When quoting wikipedia became the new Godwin's law ?? :)
George  
P: n/a

On Nov 17, 5:26*am, George Sakkis <george.sak...@gmail.comwrote:
When quoting wikipedia became the new Godwin's law ?? :)
Probably at the point the editors started becoming revisionists and
culling anything they didn't consider notable enough.  
P: n/a

Benjamin Kaplan wrote:
If you really believe that, you haven't been following this list long
enough. Every terminology dispute always includes at least 1 Wikipedia
link.
Also, you might want to look at this study: http://news.cnet.com/21001038_35997332.html
That study has been disputed; see the links at the top of
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia>.
/me ducks
  
P: n/a

On Nov 17, 11:40*am, Matt Nordhoff <mnordh...@mattnordhoff.comwrote:
That study has been disputed; see the links at the top of
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia>.
Now, if there was any independent refutation of the original study
that isn't based on Britannica's  not that I'm outright accusing them
of any bias here :)  that might make a reasonable disputation...  
P: n/a

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 04:34:40 0800, John Machin wrote:
Nothing to do with style. It was the screaming inefficiency of:
if non_trivial_condition: return x
if not non_trivial_condition: return y
that fired me up.
"Screaming inefficiency"?
Try "microoptimization". The difference in execution time between "if
x... if not x..." versus "if x... else..." on my slow, underpowered
machine is about 10**8 seconds. If that's your idea of "screaming
inefficiency" I can't understand why you're programming in Python in the
first place.
Of course, if x is an expensive function call (say, a network lookup or
database query rather than a relatively cheap list indexing operation)
then the more readable, Pythonic solution will also be significantly
faster. There's no doubt that it should be preferred  I'm not defending
it, as such, just pointing out the overreaction of dismissing what is a
generally wellwritten and thoughtout article on the basis of a
triviality.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_o...stance_fallacy
Quoted Wikipedia instant disqualification you lose. Good night.
Oh gosh, well, you've certainly proven your case, how could I be so
stupid? My apology for thinking that you were acting like an arrogant,
badtempered dick. I don't know *what* I was thinking.

Steven
who would link to Wikipedia for the definition of sarcasm except I've
already lost once in this thread and that's enough.   This discussion thread is closed Replies have been disabled for this discussion.   Question stats  viewed: 1321
 replies: 15
 date asked: Nov 16 '08
