Why doesn't my python program run forever? "Unexpectedly quit" - python

I am doing a math problem that requires me to multiply numbers and check to see if they are palindromes.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1000000)
import time
def values():
x=999
y=999
product=0
generator(x,y,product)
def generator(x,y,product):
while x >= 900:
product=x*y
strp=str(product)
check=strp[::-1]
print (check)
time.sleep(0.1)
if strp==check:
print ("done")
x=x-1
else:
y=y-1
generator(x,y,product)
values()
I am using Mac, and it goes through the loop a couple of times but then displays a "Pytho quit unexpectedly" error.

Your program is crashing because your recursion loop doesn't stop. When x reaches the value of 900 the generate function always calls the else branch of its code. You reed to add a condition for the loop to stop. Otherwise it fills up the memory, making the program crash because recursion loops have a limit on how many times you call them.

As per the answer above, your recursion never stops because once x = 900 it always recurses by calling the else code.
I suggest the following solutions:
a) If you're interested in keeping y at 999 until x is 900 and then decrease y until it's 900 you should add the following to your else (i.e. do 999x999, 999x998... 999x900 ... 998x900 ... 900 x 900):
else:
if y >= 900:
generator(x,y,product)
y=y-1
b)If you want to recurse on both of them (i.e. decrease them in parallel):
def generator(x,y,product):
if x >= 900 and y >=900:
product=x*y
strp=str(product)
check=strp[::-1]
print (check)
time.sleep(0.1)
if strp==check:
print ("done")
x=x-1
y=y-1
generator(x, y, product)
Personally I would recommend the second solution as it's neater.
Please note that when recursing on both of them you don't need to have while loops, an if check is enough.

Related

Loop Iterative Program Correctness Example - Loop Invariants and Program Termination

I need help proving the correctness of an iterative program:
def term_ex_2(x,y):
''' Pre: x and y are natural numbers '''
a = x
b = y
while a >= 0 or b >= 0:
if a > 0:
a -= 1
else:
b -= 1
return x * y
I know that I need to somehow find a loop invariant and prove it by induction on a loop. The problem is that the if/else statements here confuse me on how to come up with one.
I also have to prove whether the program terminates or not after that.
I have a general understanding on what the step by step process is but I don't know where to start on this example from the homework.
Any advice will be appreciated.
Note that in every iteration of your outer while loop, either a or b decreases by 1.
Since x and y are assumed to be natural numbers, both of them are initially > 0.
Loop Invariant: a >= 0 (Other possibilities might be there!)
Also, the program does not terminate, which is quite evident from the loop invariant above as it forces the while loop to evaluate to true always.
Proof sketch: As long as a > 0, the loop keeps on decrementing a till it reaches 0. Then the else condition starts executing which continues to decrement b forever as a == 0 makes the while loop iterate again and again.
Classic use of putting a loop invariant itself in the loop termination condition to make the loop loop infinitely!

generators, python, infinite loop

I am trying to produce a list of odd numbers using a generator (just to get a better insight into generators). I wrote the following code but, it doesn't stop running! While I expect the code stops when the condition i>n meets.
Any help is appreciated.
import sys
def odd(n):
i=0
while True:
if i%2==0:
continue
yield i
i+=1
if i>n:
return
# Here we build a generator
g = odd(10)
while True:
try:
print(next(g),end=' ')
except StopIteration:
sys.exit()
When i is even, you don't increment it, so it stays even for every subsequent iteration of the loop and never gets larger than n.
You want to increment i whether or not it is even.
def odd(n):
i=0
while True:
if i%2 != 0: # yield i only if it is odd
yield i
i+=1 # Increment i in either case
if i>n:
return
In my opinion, you have two style issues in your code that make it hard to see the problem:
The use of continue. A simple if statement would make it easier to see which code might not execute and which code will definitely execute. continue is mainly useful when you have nested if statements making things complicated.
You don't utilize the while condition. This assumes that the while loop will have to execute at least once. When writing a loop, you should generally consider what happens if the loop needs to execute 0 times. What if someone passes an argument of -1? What if you change the initial value of i to 1 to save an iteration?
def odd(n):
i = 0
while i <= n:
if i % 2:
yield i
i += 1
# Automatically return and throw StopIteration.

what are the matters of different positions of if-else in python? [duplicate]

I understand how this construct works:
for i in range(10):
print(i)
if i == 9:
print("Too big - I'm giving up!")
break
else:
print("Completed successfully")
But I don't understand why else is used as the keyword here, since it suggests the code in question only runs if the for block does not complete, which is the opposite of what it does! No matter how I think about it, my brain can't progress seamlessly from the for statement to the else block. To me, continue or continuewith would make more sense (and I'm trying to train myself to read it as such).
I'm wondering how Python coders read this construct in their head (or aloud, if you like). Perhaps I'm missing something that would make such code blocks more easily decipherable?
This question is about the underlying design decision, i.e. why it is useful to be able to write this code. See also Else clause on Python while statement for the specific question about what the syntax means.
A common construct is to run a loop until something is found and then to break out of the loop. The problem is that if I break out of the loop or the loop ends I need to determine which case happened. One method is to create a flag or store variable that will let me do a second test to see how the loop was exited.
For example assume that I need to search through a list and process each item until a flag item is found and then stop processing. If the flag item is missing then an exception needs to be raised.
Using the Python for...else construct you have
for i in mylist:
if i == theflag:
break
process(i)
else:
raise ValueError("List argument missing terminal flag.")
Compare this to a method that does not use this syntactic sugar:
flagfound = False
for i in mylist:
if i == theflag:
flagfound = True
break
process(i)
if not flagfound:
raise ValueError("List argument missing terminal flag.")
In the first case the raise is bound tightly to the for loop it works with. In the second the binding is not as strong and errors may be introduced during maintenance.
It's a strange construct even to seasoned Python coders. When used in conjunction with for-loops it basically means "find some item in the iterable, else if none was found do ...". As in:
found_obj = None
for obj in objects:
if obj.key == search_key:
found_obj = obj
break
else:
print('No object found.')
But anytime you see this construct, a better alternative is to either encapsulate the search in a function:
def find_obj(search_key):
for obj in objects:
if obj.key == search_key:
return obj
Or use a list comprehension:
matching_objs = [o for o in objects if o.key == search_key]
if matching_objs:
print('Found {}'.format(matching_objs[0]))
else:
print('No object found.')
It is not semantically equivalent to the other two versions, but works good enough in non-performance critical code where it doesn't matter whether you iterate the whole list or not. Others may disagree, but I personally would avoid ever using the for-else or while-else blocks in production code.
See also [Python-ideas] Summary of for...else threads
There's an excellent presentation by Raymond Hettinger, titled Transforming Code into Beautiful, Idiomatic Python, in which he briefly addresses the history of the for ... else construct. The relevant section is "Distinguishing multiple exit points in loops" starting at 15:50 and continuing for about three minutes. Here are the high points:
The for ... else construct was devised by Donald Knuth as a replacement for certain GOTO use cases;
Reusing the else keyword made sense because "it's what Knuth used, and people knew, at that time, all [for statements] had embedded an if and GOTO underneath, and they expected the else;"
In hindsight, it should have been called "no break" (or possibly "nobreak"), and then it wouldn't be confusing.*
So, if the question is, "Why don't they change this keyword?" then Cat Plus Plus probably gave the most accurate answer – at this point, it would be too destructive to existing code to be practical. But if the question you're really asking is why else was reused in the first place, well, apparently it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Personally, I like the compromise of commenting # no break in-line wherever the else could be mistaken, at a glance, as belonging inside the loop. It's reasonably clear and concise. This option gets a brief mention in the summary that Bjorn linked at the end of his answer:
For completeness, I should mention that with a slight change in
syntax, programmers who want this syntax can have it right now:
for item in sequence:
process(item)
else: # no break
suite
* Bonus quote from that part of the video: "Just like if we called lambda makefunction, nobody would ask, 'What does lambda do?'"
To make it simple, you can think of it like that;
If it encounters the break command in the for loop, the else part will not be called.
If it does not encounter the break command in the for loop, the else part will be called.
In other words, if for loop iteration is not "broken" with break, the else part will be called.
Because they didn't want to introduce a new keyword to the language. Each one steals an identifier and causes backwards compatibility problems, so it's usually a last resort.
I think documentation has a great explanation of else, continue
[...] it is executed when the loop terminates through exhaustion of the list (with for) or when the condition becomes false (with while), but not when the loop is terminated by a break statement."
Source: Python 2 docs: Tutorial on control flow
The easiest way I found to 'get' what the for/else did, and more importantly, when to use it, was to concentrate on where the break statement jumps to. The For/else construct is a single block. The break jumps out of the block, and so jumps 'over' the else clause. If the contents of the else clause simply followed the for clause, it would never be jumped over, and so the equivalent logic would have to be provided by putting it in an if. This has been said before, but not quite in these words, so it may help somebody else. Try running the following code fragment. I'm wholeheartedly in favour of the 'no break' comment for clarity.
for a in range(3):
print(a)
if a==4: # change value to force break or not
break
else: #no break +10 for whoever thought of this decoration
print('for completed OK')
print('statement after for loop')
EDIT - I notice this question is still running
Second better thoughts ...
The 'no break' comment is a negative. It's so much easier to understand a positive assertion, and that is that the for iterable was exhausted.
for a in range(3):
print(a)
if a==4: # change value to force break or not
print('ending for loop with a break')
break
else: # for iterable exhausted
print('ending for loop as iterable exhausted')
print('for loop ended one way or another')
That also reinforces this interpretation
if iterable_supplies_a_value:
run_the_for_with_that_value
else:
do_something_else
I read it something like:
If still on the conditions to run the loop, do stuff, else do something else.
Since the technical part has been pretty much answered, my comment is just in relation with the confusion that produce this recycled keyword.
Being Python a very eloquent programming language, the misuse of a keyword is more notorious. The else keyword perfectly describes part of the flow of a decision tree, "if you can't do this, (else) do that". It's implied in our own language.
Instead, using this keyword with while and for statements creates confusion. The reason, our career as programmers has taught us that the else statement resides within a decision tree; its logical scope, a wrapper that conditionally return a path to follow. Meanwhile, loop statements have a figurative explicit goal to reach something. The goal is met after continuous iterations of a process.
if / else indicate a path to follow. Loops follow a path until the "goal" is completed.
The issue is that else is a word that clearly define the last option in a condition. The semantics of the word are both shared by Python and Human Language. But the else word in Human Language is never used to indicate the actions someone or something will take after something is completed. It will be used if, in the process of completing it, an issue rises (more like a break statement).
At the end, the keyword will remain in Python. It's clear it was mistake, clearer when every programmer tries to come up with a story to understand its usage like some mnemonic device. I'd have loved if they have chosen instead the keyword then. I believe that this keyword fits perfectly in that iterative flow, the payoff after the loop.
It resembles that situation that some child has after following every step in assembling a toy: And THEN what Dad?
Great answers are:
this which explain the history, and
this gives the right
citation to ease yours translation/understanding.
My note here comes from what Donald Knuth once said (sorry can't find reference) that there is a construct where while-else is indistinguishable from if-else, namely (in Python):
x = 2
while x > 3:
print("foo")
break
else:
print("boo")
has the same flow (excluding low level differences) as:
x = 2
if x > 3:
print("foo")
else:
print("boo")
The point is that if-else can be considered as syntactic sugar for while-else which has implicit break at the end of its if block. The opposite implication, that while loop is extension to if, is more common (it's just repeated/looped conditional check), because if is often taught before while. However that isn't true because that would mean else block in while-else would be executed each time when condition is false.
To ease your understanding think of it that way:
Without break, return, etc., loop ends only when condition is no longer true and in such case else block will also execute once. In case of Python for you must consider C-style for loops (with conditions) or translate them to while.
Another note:
Premature break, return, etc. inside loop makes impossible for condition to become false because execution jumped out of the loop while condition was true and it would never come back to check it again.
I'm wondering how Python coders read this construct in their head (or aloud, if you like).
I simply think in my head:
"else no break was encountered..."
That's it!
This is because the else clause executes only if a break statement was NOT encountered in the for loop.
Reference:
See here: https://book.pythontips.com/en/latest/for_-_else.html#else-clause (emphasis added, and "not" changed to "NOT"):
for loops also have an else clause which most of us are unfamiliar with. The else clause executes after the loop completes normally. This means that the loop did NOT encounter a break statement.
That being said, I recommend against using this unusual feature of the language. Don't use the else clause after a for loop. It's confusing to most people, and just slows down their ability to read and understand the code.
I read it like "When the iterable is exhausted completely, and the execution is about to proceed to the next statement after finishing the for, the else clause will be executed." Thus, when the iteration is broken by break, this will not be executed.
I agree, it's more like an 'elif not [condition(s) raising break]'.
I know this is an old thread, but I am looking into the same question right now, and I'm not sure anyone has captured the answer to this question in the way I understand it.
For me, there are three ways of "reading" the else in For... else or While... else statements, all of which are equivalent, are:
else == if the loop completes normally (without a break or error)
else == if the loop does not encounter a break
else == else not (condition raising break) (presumably there is such a condition, or you wouldn't have a loop)
So, essentially, the "else" in a loop is really an "elif ..." where '...' is (1) no break, which is equivalent to (2) NOT [condition(s) raising break].
I think the key is that the else is pointless without the 'break', so a for...else includes:
for:
do stuff
conditional break # implied by else
else not break:
do more stuff
So, essential elements of a for...else loop are as follows, and you would read them in plainer English as:
for:
do stuff
condition:
break
else: # read as "else not break" or "else not condition"
do more stuff
As the other posters have said, a break is generally raised when you are able to locate what your loop is looking for, so the else: becomes "what to do if target item not located".
Example
You can also use exception handling, breaks, and for loops all together.
for x in range(0,3):
print("x: {}".format(x))
if x == 2:
try:
raise AssertionError("ASSERTION ERROR: x is {}".format(x))
except:
print(AssertionError("ASSERTION ERROR: x is {}".format(x)))
break
else:
print("X loop complete without error")
Result
x: 0
x: 1
x: 2
ASSERTION ERROR: x is 2
----------
# loop not completed (hit break), so else didn't run
Example
Simple example with a break being hit.
for y in range(0,3):
print("y: {}".format(y))
if y == 2: # will be executed
print("BREAK: y is {}\n----------".format(y))
break
else: # not executed because break is hit
print("y_loop completed without break----------\n")
Result
y: 0
y: 1
y: 2
BREAK: y is 2
----------
# loop not completed (hit break), so else didn't run
Example
Simple example where there no break, no condition raising a break, and no error are encountered.
for z in range(0,3):
print("z: {}".format(z))
if z == 4: # will not be executed
print("BREAK: z is {}\n".format(y))
break
if z == 4: # will not be executed
raise AssertionError("ASSERTION ERROR: x is {}".format(x))
else:
print("z_loop complete without break or error\n----------\n")
Result
z: 0
z: 1
z: 2
z_loop complete without break or error
----------
The else keyword can be confusing here, and as many people have pointed out, something like nobreak, notbreak is more appropriate.
In order to understand for ... else ... logically, compare it with try...except...else, not if...else..., most of python programmers are familiar with the following code:
try:
do_something()
except:
print("Error happened.") # The try block threw an exception
else:
print("Everything is find.") # The try block does things just find.
Similarly, think of break as a special kind of Exception:
for x in iterable:
do_something(x)
except break:
pass # Implied by Python's loop semantics
else:
print('no break encountered') # No break statement was encountered
The difference is python implies except break and you can not write it out, so it becomes:
for x in iterable:
do_something(x)
else:
print('no break encountered') # No break statement was encountered
Yes, I know this comparison can be difficult and tiresome, but it does clarify the confusion.
Codes in else statement block will be executed when the for loop was not be broke.
for x in xrange(1,5):
if x == 5:
print 'find 5'
break
else:
print 'can not find 5!'
#can not find 5!
From the docs: break and continue Statements, and else Clauses on Loops
Loop statements may have an else clause; it is executed when the loop terminates through exhaustion of the list (with for) or when the condition becomes false (with while), but not when the loop is terminated by a break statement. This is exemplified by the following loop, which searches for prime numbers:
>>> for n in range(2, 10):
... for x in range(2, n):
... if n % x == 0:
... print(n, 'equals', x, '*', n//x)
... break
... else:
... # loop fell through without finding a factor
... print(n, 'is a prime number')
...
2 is a prime number
3 is a prime number
4 equals 2 * 2
5 is a prime number
6 equals 2 * 3
7 is a prime number
8 equals 2 * 4
9 equals 3 * 3
(Yes, this is the correct code. Look closely: the else clause belongs to the for loop, not the if statement.)
When used with a loop, the else clause has more in common with the else clause of a try statement than it does that of if statements: a try statement’s else clause runs when no exception occurs, and a loop’s else clause runs when no break occurs. For more on the try statement and exceptions, see Handling Exceptions.
The continue statement, also borrowed from C, continues with the next iteration of the loop:
>>> for num in range(2, 10):
... if num % 2 == 0:
... print("Found an even number", num)
... continue
... print("Found a number", num)
Found an even number 2
Found a number 3
Found an even number 4
Found a number 5
Found an even number 6
Found a number 7
Found an even number 8
Found a number 9
Here's a way to think about it that I haven't seen anyone else mention above:
First, remember that for-loops are basically just syntactic sugar around while-loops. For example, the loop
for item in sequence:
do_something(item)
can be rewritten (approximately) as
item = None
while sequence.hasnext():
item = sequence.next()
do_something(item)
Second, remember that while-loops are basically just repeated if-blocks! You can always read a while-loop as "if this condition is true, execute the body, then come back and check again".
So while/else makes perfect sense: It's the exact same structure as if/else, with the added functionality of looping until the condition becomes false instead of just checking the condition once.
And then for/else makes perfect sense too: because all for-loops are just syntactic sugar on top of while-loops, you just need to figure out what the underlying while-loop's implicit conditional is, and then the else corresponds to when that condition becomes False.
for i in range(3):
print(i)
if i == 2:
print("Too big - I'm giving up!")
break;
else:
print("Completed successfully")
"else" here is crazily simple, just mean
1, "if for clause is completed"
for i in range(3):
print(i)
if i == 2:
print("Too big - I'm giving up!")
break;
if "for clause is completed":
print("Completed successfully")
It's wielding to write such long statements as "for clause is completed", so they introduce "else".
else here is a if in its nature.
2, However, How about for clause is not run at all
In [331]: for i in range(0):
...: print(i)
...:
...: if i == 9:
...: print("Too big - I'm giving up!")
...: break
...: else:
...: print("Completed successfully")
...:
Completed successfully
So it's completely statement is logic combination:
if "for clause is completed" or "not run at all":
do else stuff
or put it this way:
if "for clause is not partially run":
do else stuff
or this way:
if "for clause not encounter a break":
do else stuff
Here's another idiomatic use case besides searching. Let's say you wanted to wait for a condition to be true, e.g. a port to be open on a remote server, along with some timeout. Then you could utilize a while...else construct like so:
import socket
import time
sock = socket.socket()
timeout = time.time() + 15
while time.time() < timeout:
if sock.connect_ex(('127.0.0.1', 80)) is 0:
print('Port is open now!')
break
print('Still waiting...')
else:
raise TimeoutError()
I was just trying to make sense of it again myself. I found that the following helps!
• Think of the else as being paired with the if inside the loop (instead of with the for) - if condition is met then break the loop, else do this - except it's one else paired with multiple ifs!
• If no ifs were satisfied at all, then do the else.
• The multiple ifs can also actually be thought of as if-elifs!
for i in range(10):
print(i)
if i == 9:
print("Too big - I'm giving up!")
break;
else:
print("Completed successfully")
break keyword is used to end the loop. if the i = 9 then the loop will end. while any if conditions did not much the satisfaction, then the else will do the rest part.
The else clause executes after the loop completes normally. This means The :==>
else block just after for/while is executed only when the loop is NOT terminated by a break statement
for item in lista:
if(obj == item ):
print("if True then break will run and else not run")
break;
else:
print("in else => obj not fount ")
You could think of it like,
else as in the rest of the stuff, or the other stuff, that wasn't done in the loop.
A loop's else branch executes once, regardless of whether the loop enters its body or not, unless the loop body is entered but does not finish. That is, inside the loop a break or return statement is encountered.
my_list = []
for i in my_list:
print(i, end=',')
else:
print('loop did not enter')
##################################
for i in range(1,6,1):
print(i, end=',')
else:
print('loop completed successfully:', i)
##################################
for i in range(1,6,1):
if i == 3:
print('loop did not finish:', i)
break
print(i, end=',')
else:
print('else:', i)
Output:
loop did not enter
1,2,3,4,5,loop completed successfully: 5
1,2,loop did not finish: 3
It's the same for while-else.
import random
random.seed(8)
i = 100
while i < 90:
print(i, end=',')
i = random.randint(0,100)
else:
print('loop did not enter:', i)
##################################
i = 25
while i < 90:
print(i, end=',')
i = random.randint(0,100)
else:
print('loop completed successfully:', i)
##################################
i = 25
while i < 90:
if i % 10 == 0:
print('loop did not finish:', i)
break
print(i, end=',')
i = random.randint(0,100)
else:
print('else:', i)
Output:
loop did not enter: 100
25,29,47,48,16,24,loop completed successfully: 90
25,5,loop did not finish: 10
I consider the structure as for (if) A else B, and for(if)-else is a special if-else, roughly. It may help to understand else.
A and B is executed at most once, which is the same as if-else structure.
for(if) can be considered as a special if, which does a loop to try to meet the if condition. Once the if condition is met, A and break; Else, B.

Trying to find the 1000th prime number

I am trying to write a script in python to find the 1000th prime number. I don't understand why this isn't working here. Basically while the mod is less than the square root of the number and still has a remainder, the mod goes up by one. This should continue until the mod equals the square root of the number. Then the check should remain at 0 and the number should be prime. Every time I try to run the script it tells me theres a system error.
import math
b=2
count=2
next_odd=3
next_prime=1
check = 0
while count<=10:
while b<float(math.sqrt(next_odd)):
if next_odd%b>0:
b+=1
if next_odd%b == 0:
check+=1
if check > 0:
next_prime=next_odd
next_odd+=2
print(next_prime)
b=2
count+=1`
I understand what you are trying to do, but unfortunately there were too many things wrong with your program. Here is a working version. I made minimal changes. Hopefully you can compare the below version with your own and see where you went wrong.
import math
count=2
next_odd=3
next_prime=1
while count<=1000:
b=1
check = 0
while b<float(math.sqrt(next_odd)):
b+=1
if next_odd%b == 0:
check+=1
if check == 0:
next_prime=next_odd
print(next_prime)
count+=1
next_odd+=2
With the above program, 1000th prime can be successfully determined to be 7919.
(first, I assume the tick on the end of your code is a typo in your stack overflow post, not the code itself)
Consider what happens when next_odd is prime. This block:
while b<float(math.sqrt(next_odd)):
if next_odd%b>0:
b+=1
if next_odd%b == 0:
check+=1
will increment b up until the square root of next_odd without ever incrementing check. That means that if check > 0: won't pass, and thus count never increments, and you then you just spin around in the
while count<=10:, skipping both if blocks because their conditions are false.
In other words, you don't actually say what to do when next_odd is prime. This is also an example of why while shouldn't really be used when all you want to do is increment through numbers (which is what you're using it for here). Try something like this:
max_num = 10000 # or whatever
for odd in range(3, max_num, 2):
factor_count = 0
for factor in range(2, math.floor(math.sqrt(max_num)) + 1):
if odd % factor == 0:
factor_count += 1
if factor_count == 0:
print(odd)
A couple points about this code:
There's no (non-constant) variables in the global scope. That makes it much easier to reason about how the script's state changes over time.
The use of for-loops over while-loops guarantees that our script won't get caught in an infinite loop due to an erroneous (or unaccounted for) condition.
The use of for-loops means that we don't have to worry about incrementing all of the variables ourselves, which dramatically reduces the amount of state that we have to manage.
Hope that helps!
Oh, note that there are much more efficient ways to compute primes also. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieve_of_Eratosthenes

How do I double my step variable for each for-loop iteration in Python 3?

I'm new to Python, and I'm playing around with recursive functions just for practice.
I made the following algorithm which takes a number as x and halves it until it is equal to 1. n is the number of times x has been halved.
def binary(x, n = 0):
print(n,":",x)
x = x // 2
n += 1
if x > 0:
binary(x, n)
return x
return x
I'm trying to make a loop that will call binary() with multiple values for x. I want my step to be doubled each iteration. I have it working with a while loop like the one below.
i = 1
while i < 1000000000:
print("when x is", i, ":")
binary(i)
i += i
For some reason though, I can't seem to achieve the same thing with a For loop. Here's what I have now.
for i in range(1,1000):
print("when x is", i, ":")
binary(i)
i += i
In the code above, i += i does not seem to effect the i in my header. I know that range() takes a third parameter called step, but I've tried this:
for i in range(1,1000, i += i):
# statements
This gives me a name error, and says "i is not defined".
Most of my experience with programming is in JavaScript and C#. In both of those languages I wouldn't of had any trouble doing this.
How would I get this to work in a For loop using Python 3?
The third parameter of range is indeed step. But you should use it with a computed value like:
for i in range(1,1000,2):
#statements
The reason why your i += i didn't worked is because, under the hood, the for-loop is executing something similar to i = next(...) at the end of an iteration, overiding your last increment.
Edit
You can achieve the desired effect using a generator, but it kinda kills the "trying to avoid while-loops" thing:
def myrange(start, stop):
i = start
while i < stop:
yield i
i += i
for i in myrange(1, 1000):
print(i)
Anyway, while-loops are perfectly valid constructs and I’d personnally go with one in this case. Do not forget that the for-loop has a rather different semantic in python than in both languages you’re used to. So trying to use a for-loop because you are able to do so with javascript seems like a bad idea if all what you need is a while-loop.
range can step by a fixed amount, but not a variable amount. Use a while-loop to increment i by i:
i += i
You could replace the while-loop with an iterator, such as:
import itertools as IT
for i in (2**i for i in IT.count()):
if i >= 1000000000: break
print("when x is", i, ":")
binary(i)
but I don't think this has any advantage over a simple while-loop.
If all you're doing is doubling i, then why not just raise it to the power?
for p in range(int(1000000000**0.5)):
print(binary(2**p)

Categories

Resources