5 ms·

Hold my beer! https://i.redd.it/8waggyjyyle51.png https://i.redd.it/8waggyjyyle51.png

ChadNauseam 4y ago
Hold mine :D https://github.com/anchpop/genomics_viz/blob/master/genomics-viz/Assets/StreamingAssets/Chromosomal/Scripts/chromsdata_tools/chromsdata_tools/compilation.py#L292-L433 https://github.com/anchpop/genomics_viz/blob/master/genomics... That's one expression because it used to be part of a giant comprehension, but I moved it into a function for a bit more readability. I'm considering moving it back just for kicks though. My philosophy is: if you're only barely smart enough to code it, you aren't smart enough to debug it. Therefore, you should code at your limit, to force yourself to get smarter while debugging
- teddyh 4y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/uosex4/no_please_no/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/uosex4/no_...
- agumonkey 4y ago
  That code is fine in my book, there's more static code than for-comp and it's at work 3 level deep with no hard coupling between levels. Also well spaced and worded.
- int_19h 4y ago
  Yours is nice and readable. Parents' one is not, but it feels like the indentation is deliberately confusing. I'd lay it out like so: tags = list(set([ nel for subli in [ mel for subl in [ [[jel.split('/')[2:] for jel in el] for el in classified ] for mel in subl ] for nel in subli if nel ])) Still not very readable, tho. But that's largely due to Python's outputs-first sequence comprehension syntax being a mess that doesn't scale at all. Side note: one other thing I always hated about those things in Python is that there's no way to bind an intermediary computation to a variable. In C# LINQ, you can do things like: from x in xs let y = x.ComputeSomething() where y.IsFoo && y.IsBar select y In Python, you have to either invoke ComputeSomething twice, or hack "for" to work like "let" by wrapping the bound value in a container: y for x in xs for y in [x.ComputeSomething()] if y.IsFoo and y.IsBar It's not just about not repeating yourself or not running the same code twice, either - named variables are themselves a form of self-documenting code, and a sequence pipeline using them even where they aren't strictly needed can be much more readable.
  - texaslonghorn5 4y ago
    Does the new walrus := in python solve your problem?
    - roelschroeven 4y ago
      The official name is assignment expression, which can be good to know to find documentation. Here's the PEP: https://peps.python.org/pep-0572/ https://peps.python.org/pep-0572/
      - otherme123 4y ago
        Curiously, searching the docs for "walrus" (https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=walrus https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=walrus) yields exactly the results you need, but searching for "assignment expression" yields the previous results mixed a lot of other results due to the word "expression".
    - int_19h 4y ago
      Not really; where would you put it inside the []?
      - dragonwriter 4y ago
        In the example from the end of the earlier post: y for x in xs if (y:=x.ComputeSomething()).IsFoo and y.IsBar
        int_19h 4y ago
        I suppose that works, although readability is not great, to put it mildly.
        texaslonghorn5 4y ago
        Much better would be [(y:=x.ComputeSomething()) for x in xs if y.IsFoo and y.IsBar]
wvh 4y ago
I don't think this is bad code. Maybe not the most Pythonic in the imperative sense, but certainly you could come across such constructs in languages that are more oriented towards functional programming. This could also be solved in a more readable manner by having a generator pipeline, though it would be a good idea to see what the performance of chained generators is like in your version and flavour of Python.
kzrdude 4y ago
It's “not even” using for nesting in list comprehensions. This kind of thing: [x for stop in range(5) for x in range(stop)]

Hold mine :D https://github.com/anchpop/genomics_viz/blob/master/genomics-viz/Assets/StreamingAssets/Chromosomal/Scripts/chromsdata_tools/chromsdata_tools/compilation.py#L292-L433 https://github.com/anchpop/genomics_viz/blob/master/genomics... That's one expression because it used to be part of a giant comprehension, but I moved it into a function for a bit more readability. I'm considering moving it back just for kicks though. My philosophy is: if you're only barely smart enough to code it, you aren't smart enough to debug it. Therefore, you should code at your limit, to force yourself to get smarter while debugging

teddyh 4y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/uosex4/no_please_no/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/uosex4/no_...
agumonkey 4y ago
That code is fine in my book, there's more static code than for-comp and it's at work 3 level deep with no hard coupling between levels. Also well spaced and worded.
int_19h 4y ago
Yours is nice and readable. Parents' one is not, but it feels like the indentation is deliberately confusing. I'd lay it out like so: tags = list(set([ nel for subli in [ mel for subl in [ [[jel.split('/')[2:] for jel in el] for el in classified ] for mel in subl ] for nel in subli if nel ])) Still not very readable, tho. But that's largely due to Python's outputs-first sequence comprehension syntax being a mess that doesn't scale at all. Side note: one other thing I always hated about those things in Python is that there's no way to bind an intermediary computation to a variable. In C# LINQ, you can do things like: from x in xs let y = x.ComputeSomething() where y.IsFoo && y.IsBar select y In Python, you have to either invoke ComputeSomething twice, or hack "for" to work like "let" by wrapping the bound value in a container: y for x in xs for y in [x.ComputeSomething()] if y.IsFoo and y.IsBar It's not just about not repeating yourself or not running the same code twice, either - named variables are themselves a form of self-documenting code, and a sequence pipeline using them even where they aren't strictly needed can be much more readable.
- texaslonghorn5 4y ago
  Does the new walrus := in python solve your problem?
  - roelschroeven 4y ago
    The official name is assignment expression, which can be good to know to find documentation. Here's the PEP: https://peps.python.org/pep-0572/ https://peps.python.org/pep-0572/
    - otherme123 4y ago
      Curiously, searching the docs for "walrus" (https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=walrus https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=walrus) yields exactly the results you need, but searching for "assignment expression" yields the previous results mixed a lot of other results due to the word "expression".
  - int_19h 4y ago
    Not really; where would you put it inside the []?
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      In the example from the end of the earlier post: y for x in xs if (y:=x.ComputeSomething()).IsFoo and y.IsBar
      - int_19h 4y ago
        I suppose that works, although readability is not great, to put it mildly.
      - texaslonghorn5 4y ago
        Much better would be [(y:=x.ComputeSomething()) for x in xs if y.IsFoo and y.IsBar]

wvh 4y ago

I don't think this is bad code. Maybe not the most Pythonic in the imperative sense, but certainly you could come across such constructs in languages that are more oriented towards functional programming. This could also be solved in a more readable manner by having a generator pipeline, though it would be a good idea to see what the performance of chained generators is like in your version and flavour of Python.

kzrdude 4y ago

It's “not even” using for nesting in list comprehensions. This kind of thing: [x for stop in range(5) for x in range(stop)]