User talk:Hout: Difference between revisions
(Matches all three criteria, and arguably to a higher degree than the example which has been left in place.) |
(Check wikipedia?) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Both examples are illustrative of such resources as JavaScript is currently able to provide for patterns of this kind. |
Both examples are illustrative of such resources as JavaScript is currently able to provide for patterns of this kind. |
||
: Hi Hout, unfortunately map & filter are the other way of doing things that are not list comprehensions. map&filter are arguably as well known a method as list comprehensions and some languages have both map & filter and list comprehensions as part of the language. The [[wp:List comprehension]] article also makes the distinction up front. Maybe I should add that fact to the task? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 20:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:16, 7 September 2015
Restored this on the grounds that it matches all three of the stated requirements:
- They should be distinct from (nested) for loops within the syntax of the language. - They should return either a list or an iterator (something that returns successive members of a collection, in order). - The syntax has parts corresponding to that of set-builder notation.
It uses no for loops, returns a list, and has the parts corresponding to set-building notation.
The previous alternative is useful, but is restricted to a smaller subset of JavaScript, and arguably uses for loops.
If we are to delete one, we should delete both, but I am not sure that either approach has much value.
Both examples are illustrative of such resources as JavaScript is currently able to provide for patterns of this kind.
- Hi Hout, unfortunately map & filter are the other way of doing things that are not list comprehensions. map&filter are arguably as well known a method as list comprehensions and some languages have both map & filter and list comprehensions as part of the language. The wp:List comprehension article also makes the distinction up front. Maybe I should add that fact to the task? --Paddy3118 (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC)