map, filter, reduce, zip, range, and.. slice?

[George Demmy]

Skip Montanaro <skip at pobox.com> writes:

>     George> Eddie's solution in the lambda notation...
> 
>     George> divide = lambda x,s=1: [ x[i:i+s] for i in range(0,len(x),s) ]
>     ...
>     George> Love them lambdas...
> 
> Just out of curiosity, what's the advantage you perceive of lambda over
> 
>     def divide(x, s=1):
>         return [ x[i:i+s] for i in range(0,len(x),s) ]
> 
> in this situation?
> 
> -- 
> Skip Montanaro (skip at pobox.com)
> http://www.mojam.com/
> http://www.musi-cal.com/
> 
Skip Montanaro writes:
 > 
 >     George> Eddie's solution in the lambda notation...
 > 
 >     George> divide = lambda x,s=1: [ x[i:i+s] for i in range(0,len(x),s) ]
 >     ...
 >     George> Love them lambdas...
 > 
 > Just out of curiosity, what's the advantage you perceive of lambda over
 > 
 >     def divide(x, s=1):
 >         return [ x[i:i+s] for i in range(0,len(x),s) ]
 > 
 > in this situation?
 > 
 > -- 
 > Skip Montanaro (skip at pobox.com)
 > http://www.mojam.com/
 > http://www.musi-cal.com/

Hi Skip,

There is no "Pythonic" advantage to this representation of which I
know -- I rather suspect there are some serious performance hits with
the lambda form. The orginal poster had mentioned that he was doing a
lot of hacking using nested lambda forms -- he obviously *not*
interested in maximizing Python performance! I just thought it was
interesting to generalize Eddie's "divide" pattern using a lambda form.

Cheers!

G
-- 
George Demmy
Layton Graphics, Inc