Correction: 1 is not prime. My is_prime function is flawed!

@JimMaz

Жыл бұрын

You've made a b001 of yourself

@damian4601

Жыл бұрын

just make nums range(2,1000) to exclude 1 instead of making 999 num!=1 comparison

@careca_3201

Жыл бұрын

@@damian4601 or just add another condition, because you might want to use 1 in a non prime numbers list

@thefredster55

Жыл бұрын

Couldn't you just set nums equal to 1000 instead of range(1,1000) since you're passing it into a range in the function? (Genuine question, literal n00b here)

@Killercam1225

Жыл бұрын

@@thefredster55 Nope, because it creates an array of numbers in that given range. So the function iterates through each number in the list and and the filter function creates an object, which then he passes the object through the [list] method which puts all of the values contained in that object into a [list] where the output can be comprehended.

Minor thing, but you can make the prime checking function faster by going up to floor(sqrt(n)) instead.

@slammy333

Жыл бұрын

Could make it even faster by only iterating over odd numbers as well

@programmertheory

Жыл бұрын

def is_prime(x): if x return False if x

@darkfireguy

Жыл бұрын

​@@slammy333 you can make it even faster by only checking n-1 and n+1 where n is each multiple of 6

@sidneydriscoll5579

Жыл бұрын

def isPrime(x): if x == 1: return False if x == 2: return False if x == 3: return True if x == 4: return False This is what you call fast!

@FuzioN2006

Жыл бұрын

Why is a youtube comment thread more productive than my work team... FML

my man actually made the least efficient function in the history of functions

@chervilious

Жыл бұрын

Not only that, it's also wrong

@chemma9240

8 ай бұрын

😂

@rkidy

7 ай бұрын

Crazy that when doing a demonstration you focus on ease of understanding the concept rather than efficient of an algorithm unrelated to what he is demonstrating 🤯🤯🤯

@fruitguy407

7 ай бұрын

False, I can and do write worse code with more flaws. You're welcome.

@ImThatGuy000

6 ай бұрын

im new to python, could you explain why?

primes = [x for x in range(2, 1000) if isPrime(x)]

@krakenzback7971

Жыл бұрын

yeah cuz 1 is not prime

@BookOfSaints

Жыл бұрын

I think his point is to use list comprehension which is the better choice here.

@krakenzback7971

Жыл бұрын

@@BookOfSaints yeah this is list comprehension

@BeasenBear

10 ай бұрын

It says "isprime" or "Prime" is not defined when I tried this code. What did I miss?

@ItzMeKarizma

7 ай бұрын

@@BeasenBear kinda late but he's calling a function called isPrime and you probably didn't define that function (I don't know if it's supposed to be imported or written by yourself, I use C++).

"all python programers should know this: pep-8" when

@yujielee

Жыл бұрын

💀💀💀

@feDUP1337

Жыл бұрын

So damn true

@Cristobal512

Жыл бұрын

What is that?

@vorpal22

Жыл бұрын

@@Cristobal512 PEP-8 consists of the Python recommended standards and best practices.

@user-cg1ul8bh8w

7 ай бұрын

Pep8 is just for jealous and mean programmers..... It just unreadable

For those concerned for its complexity, remember you can always use sieve of eratosthenes in most cases, this only would be required in case of big numbers

@nagyzoli

11 ай бұрын

Sieve works for any number, and it is the most optimal way of generating sequences of primes.

Okay that time complexity tho

@TheG7

Жыл бұрын

Ikr, it would’ve help to use the root of num but still

@moy92

Жыл бұрын

newbie here, how would you improve? i thought list comprehensions but dont know ways improve on time complexity

@rogerab1792

Жыл бұрын

​@@moy92 memoization

@rutabega306

Жыл бұрын

@moy92 There are a few ways you can reduce the time complexity because the one in the video is so suboptimal (quadratic time) You can bring it down to O(Nsqrt(N)) by just checking for factors below the square root. But since we are already collecting a list of primes, we can use some kind of sieve algorithm (look up Sieve of Eratosthones on wikipedia). This will be O(NloglogN) or even less depending on the algorithm.

@TheG7

Жыл бұрын

you don't even need if statements to find prime numbers

A better is_prime function would be: def is_prime(num): if num == 1 or num == 0: return False for x in range(2, floor(sqrt(num))): if num % n == 0: return False return True This does three things. First, it factors in the fact that 1 is not prime. (It’s neither prime nor composite.) Second, it accounts for the fact that 0 isn’t prime either (as 0 is highly composite, having literally every integer as a factor). And third, it increases the speed of the function since it only needs to go to the square root of the number. This works because every composite number has at least one factor that is greater than 1 and less than or equal to its square root. Indeed, given any integer x such that x > 1, for every factor _a_ of x that is less than √x, there is exactly one other factor _b_ of x that is greater than √x such that _a_ × _b_ = x. (For 1, it has exactly one factor (itself), and its lone factor is also its square root. For 0, it has infinite factors (everything), but its square root (itself) is less than all other whole numbers.) Incidentally, if num is less than 2, then both range(2, num) and range(2, floor(sqrt(num))) will return an empty iterable that will cause the body of the for loop to never be executed. As such, any value for num that is less than 2 will return True for the original version of is_prime, and any value for num that is less than 0, between 0 and 1, or between 1 and 2 will return True for my version of is_prime. We could add a check for nonintegers: if num != floor(num): return False However, that isn’t strictly necessary, since the input should be an integer, and in Python, we assume the developer would not put a fraction into the function. And it’s not like the code would throw an error in such a case, anyways. The better question is with regards to negative numbers. There are four ways to consider this. First, we could just assume that the developer would never input a negative number. This is fine… unless we’re getting input from a user, in which case either the developer or the function should do a check. The second way is to treat all negative numbers as composite on the grounds that they each have at least three factors: 1, itself, and −1 (where we only include −1 as a factor if the number itself is negative), and prime numbers must have exactly 2. In that case, our first conditional would instead be: if num == 1 or num

@tyrigrut

7 ай бұрын

As a mathematician, #3 and #4 are the correct options here. Either you're working over positive integers, in which case you should throw an exception if negative, or you are working over all integers, which you can use the general definition of a prime element over a commutative ring: p is prime if p is non zero, p is not a unit (here a unit is 1 or -1), and if p=a*b for a and b integers then either p divides a or p divides b. You can see based on this definition that 6 is not a prime: 6=2*3 but 6 does not divide 2 or 3 evenly (i.e. 2/6 and 3/6 are not integers). Similarly for (-6)=(-2)*3, so -6 is not prime. And for positive primes p, we must have p=(±1)*(±p), and p divides ±p. Similarly, -p=(∓1)*(±p), and -p divides ±p. So p is prime is equivalent to saying -p is prime. Notice that over all integers, all primes p have 4 factors: 1, -1, p, -p. It is incorrect to assume all primes have 2 factors, otherwise the only primes over the integers would be 1 and -1.

@brianhull2407

7 ай бұрын

@@tyrigrut Thank you for your input! I was unaware of how primes work under anything other than nonnegative integers, so I wasn’t aware of the “four factor” definition. I figured there probably _was_ something, though. That said, it is worth noting that, in computing, we don’t always want perfect mathematical accuracy. Sometimes, we prefer speed over accuracy.

@tree_addict280

23 күн бұрын

but its almost as if when trying to explain a topic you use the most relative and easy things to understand.

@Boltkiller96

4 сағат бұрын

you wrote the whole documentation for this function hats off!

Even as a junior web developer, I really like how you do these shorts. It concisely and simply explains whats going on in the shorts.

@b001

Жыл бұрын

Thanks so much! Glad you enjoy!

@originalbinaryhustler3876

Жыл бұрын

​@@b001 keep these shorts coming ❤❤❤❤

@prouddesk6577

7 ай бұрын

His code is horrible. I am sorry but dont watch this guy.

Sieve of Eratosthenes is much better for this , but only if u need nums from 1 sieve works with O(n) in spite of this which works withO(n*sqrt(n))

@vorpal22

Жыл бұрын

Doesn't this actually run in O(n^2) since for a prime number, he's checking up to n-1 instead of sqrt(n)? Agreed that Sieve of Eratosthenes is the way to go, and it's a really easy algorithm to understand.

@user-zn6gn2oq5i

Ай бұрын

​@@vorpal22 yes

You can also do primes = [i for i in list(nums) if is_prime(i)]

@kazzaaz

Жыл бұрын

this is the way it should be done

@danielf5393

Жыл бұрын

You don’t need to cast to list (and you shouldn’t if nums is a long generator)

@kazzaaz

Жыл бұрын

​@@danielf5393 For long inputs or generators, another generator also outperforms map/filter pipeline. gen = (i for i in list(nums) if is_prime(i)) for x in gen: print(x)

@danielf5393

Жыл бұрын

@@kazzaaz hence prime_generator = ( i for i in nums if is_prime(i) ) I’m complaining about “list(nums)” specifically.

@hrocxvid

Жыл бұрын

This was the first thing I thought of

For a relatively large number, the isprime func will take a long time to return true or false. Instead of checking every integer

@alexwhitewood6480

Жыл бұрын

Previous primes upto square root of nums*

@reef2005

Жыл бұрын

@@alexwhitewood6480 yes indeed

I usually prefer the list comprehension method instead of filter ie: [n for n in nums if is_prime(n)]

@arjundureja

Жыл бұрын

List comprehension is also faster since. you don't need to convert it back to a list

@salvatorearpino9243

Жыл бұрын

@@codeman99-dev timing performance was pretty similar between the two methods. When you check out the disassembled python bytecode (using the dis module), list comprehension has more operations with the python interpreter, so it will most likely not be preferable for code that uses multiple threads (it's more susceptible to global interpreter lock slowing it down)

@vorpal22

Жыл бұрын

List comprehensions are faster, and in this case, a generator would be even better. Both map and filter are discouraged in Python 3.

so if you had a list from 1 to 1000... *proceeds to show a list from 1 to 999

Sieve of Eratostenes where you take a vector bool of all trues, then you start a loop from i²(i = 2 to √N) and flag all the multiples in the vector. The position of the trues left in the vector are all the prime numbers till N. This is simpler shorter and well known.

Dude makes me wanna get programing socks and learn python

scientists: use powerful computers to find new primes me: types infinity intead of 1000

I would use a generator function to generate a (possibly infinite) sequence of primes by keeping a record of all previously found primes and checking if the next number is divisible by any of those (that should all be smaller than the number) in order. Uses a tiny bit more memory but cuts down on a lot of division operations.

@jaserogers997

Жыл бұрын

Using a sieve (if you had an upper limit) would be faster than that.

@plaskut

8 ай бұрын

generator with sieve

@OMGclueless

5 ай бұрын

@@plaskut It's possible to make an infinite generator with a sieve but it's actually pretty complicated. The sieve by default marks all multiples of a prime the first time you encounter that prime, which is impossible if the generator is infinite. Instead you'd need to suspend and then resume the markings later as you advance through the generator, which is possible but pretty tricky to get right.

@plaskut

5 ай бұрын

@@OMGclueless I think I might try doing this. I believe it's a divergent function, so at some point it might have to check to see if the universe has ended yet.

I tried your code and it worked! I'll check your channel for more!

getting more and more declarative, love it

You only need to check if it's divisible by smaller primes.

@alpacalord507

Жыл бұрын

But than you need to have a list with primes, so this does not really help

@thesnakednake

Жыл бұрын

@@alpacalord507 You can build the list as you go; if you let the is_prime function take the existing prime list into account, you can just append new primes you find until you reach the end of the range. However, you can only do this when you’re making the list in order from 2 like this, since you wouldn’t have all the prior primes otherwise

@alpacalord507

Жыл бұрын

@@thesnakednake And? That's still not solving the problem of checking if a number is prime. You're making a list of primes now, which does not (really) help us checking if a number is prime.

@dfsgjlgsdklgjnmsidrg

Жыл бұрын

@@alpacalord507 u stupid but your profilpic is meliodas so im not mad

@thesnakednake

Жыл бұрын

@@alpacalord507 The task in the video is to make a list of the primes from 1 to 1000, not just to check if a number is prime. The function that checks it in this video is a means to an end, not the end goal

Alternatively, you can use a conditional within a list comprehension: [ n for n in nums if is_prime(n) ]

@HussamHadi

Жыл бұрын

This is the correct pythonic way of solving it. Avoid using filter whenever possible

@e1ke1k96

Жыл бұрын

Or even : [n for n in nums if n%2==0]

@nullopt5174

Жыл бұрын

@@e1ke1k96 that’s not how you define a prime number.

@patrickcuster2348

Жыл бұрын

The tradeoff is that a list comprehension is going to store the whole list in memory while filter keeps it as a generator until needed. Both are pythonic and have their uses

@AWriterWandering

Жыл бұрын

@@patrickcuster2348 yes, but in the video he used to list function, so a list was the intended output anyway.

This is really awesome! I was making a program the other day and I kept getting a similar return to the one you show at the end there and had no idea what was going on! Life saver!

Thank you. I love your channel

I must admit that I'm a little mad that this didn't show up when I needed it but this tips are very cool and informative!

@user-yj3mf1dk7b

Жыл бұрын

open book

I love python even more bcoz of you. You are absolutely amazing thanks & keep uploading such clips

@vorpal22

Жыл бұрын

He's not teaching you modern Python practices. You should not use filter and map in Python 3.

This also 100% explains why functions are amazing. Return is better than break.

primes=[ n for n in range(2, 1000) if all(n%x for x in range(2, int(n**0.5))) ]

Props to you for making videos where you know that 90% of the comments will be “well actually….” Or some other form of telling you how you are wrong and should have done it their way.

@davesharp5472

Жыл бұрын

​@Harrod Thou Thanks for chiming in. Id say its more ironic you dont view comments like "Thanks for teaching job applicants to not format their code properly and also use a less readable alternative of list comprehensions." as negative. I'm offering support to b001 and props for sticking his neck out there. This field particularly is filled with people who love nothing more than to correct people, not too dissimilar to your response to me. See Stack Overflow for example. Have a good day.

@zhairewelch8291

Жыл бұрын

@Harrod Thou the neg comments are there, it just doesn’t take up 90% of the comment section.

@Pharisaeus

Жыл бұрын

Not sure if it's such a great idea. I personally always report such videos, eg. as "misinformation" and choose for them to not be recommended any more.

I had to code that in assembly once

@Jakku_Azzo

Жыл бұрын

Had to code it in brain fuck the other day *cracks knuckles* R/iamverysmart

I'm just learning python, thanks for showing me the filter function!

thanks for the tips!

bro what is that vscode theme its so nice

@hezztia

Жыл бұрын

It's "SynthWave '84" from Robb Owen. It has an option (called "neon dreams") that makes the letters glowy, but i don't use it because i don't like it.

@Matias-rx1wk

Жыл бұрын

@@hezztiafont?

Nice demo of filter(). In reality one should use the Eratosthenes' sieve to obtain large lists of primes in python

@Rugg-qk4pl

Жыл бұрын

In double reality one should download a large list of primes

@GordieGii

Жыл бұрын

Is that because it takes less time, less ram, fewer lines of code, or is easier to understand?

@Rugg-qk4pl

Жыл бұрын

@@GordieGii Sieve is going to be significantly faster, but more lines of code. Not sure on the memory usage. But as long as it's clear you are implementing the sieve, difficulty to understand shouldn't be an issue.

@GordieGii

Жыл бұрын

@@Rugg-qk4pl That makes sense. The original video said that one objective was to save memory. Since range is an itterable, it only produces the next number and returns it to filter so the list only ever contains the primes. To do Eratosthenes' sieve you need to have all the numbers in the list and then prune them. I suppose you would only need a bool or a bit for each number, but then you would need bit handling routines. Probably already libraries for that sort of thing.

You can also remove checks by going up to the square root of the value because anything past that would a repeat of something already checked.

Like it’s the same as: primes = [num for num in nums if isPrime(num)]

Print(list(filter(list(map(lambda x: x is not any([x%y==0 for y un range (2,x)]), [i for i in range (1000)])))))

@RayTracingX

7 ай бұрын

Imao😮

@heoungminkim1108

Ай бұрын

Bro, You are truly pythonic. :)

@Rando2101

Ай бұрын

Imagine changing x%y==0 to (not x%y) tho

Sheesh nice trick my friend!!

You could also use primes = [x for x in nums if is_prime(x)]

Thanks man you're the best!

Could be more efficient, when checking for a prime you only have to check for factos up too the square root of the number, so if you square root the high end of the range it should work faster!

Map function easier?

@tinahalder8416

Жыл бұрын

I was also thinking the same

Thanks for helping

What python extension do you use in vscode? It's more colorful than mine and I'm jealous!

I want to learn to code but it’s intimidating tbh . I’m no genius . Not gonna let that stop me from going for it though 💯

@AbdulRehman-rf2cc

Жыл бұрын

less gooo

@bonquaviusdingle5720

11 ай бұрын

it has a steep learning curve in the beginning but gets very easy, like learning to drive a car

Just use Sieve of Eratosthenes, get better time complexity of O(nloglogn)

@SegFaultMatt

Жыл бұрын

That’s the way I’d do it. Much better than this method, sad your only upvote is me.

@NathanSMS26

Жыл бұрын

The prime thing was just an example to show off the filter function

@jackomeme

Жыл бұрын

Combine that with memorization, you can reduce the big O

@Rando2101

Ай бұрын

​@@jackomeme I'm late, but how? I can't really see it

You do not need to check numbers from 2 to num. No divisor of greater than the square root of num needs to be checked if you check those less than that square root.

Love to see a beginner friendly version of this codeing practice because I know how it looks after generations of programmer optimized the shit out of it in countless different languages since primes are essential for cryptography 😅

Thanks for teaching job applicants to not format their code properly and also use a less readable alternative of list comprehensions.

@archigan1

Жыл бұрын

beat me to it

@kaniran1

Жыл бұрын

Was looking for the list comprehension answer :-D

@johnr3936

Жыл бұрын

Actually terrible way to write python. Do you think its just bait? I would not merge that

@the_lava_wielder6996

Жыл бұрын

Bro you guys unironically code in python it doesn't matter anyways

@eck1997rock

Жыл бұрын

What should we use sensei?

we have all of the prime numbers 1, 2, 3 💀💀

@-sn4k3-94

Жыл бұрын

It’s prime, what’s wrong?

@finnyass1407

Жыл бұрын

@@-sn4k3-94 1 isn’t a prime number tho

@asi3136

9 ай бұрын

​@@finnyass1407argument of semantics, it's generally not considered a prime but the arguments are vibes

If you're going to immediately turn it back into a list, don't use filter, use a list comprehension because it's faster. If you only need an iterator, then use filter.

hey you can make this is_prime() function a bit more efficient by keeping x in the range(2,sqrt(num)+1) and keep an exception if-else for the number 1 hope that helps

People using pandas: 😂🤣

Great example of what the filter class does, but when converting to other datatypes you should use that specific class's comprehension. Example: print([number for number in range(1000) if is_prime(number)])

Wow, that one was very helpful

Beautiful exponential time complexity

@7268896

Жыл бұрын

It's quadratic, not exponential

@llollercoaster

Жыл бұрын

@@7268896 good catch. you're right

Pythons freedom to not declare variables and data types makes me appreciate Java.

@tinahalder8416

Жыл бұрын

Huuhhh? Ur word confuses me wise man

@eazyg885

Жыл бұрын

@@tinahalder8416 in Java you have to specify the type of a variable when declaring it (String, int, char) which cannot be changed afterwards, while in Python the type of a variable is dynamic (i.e. it changes based on the input). This makes it easier to make mistakes if you’re not paying enough attention

@gJonii

Жыл бұрын

@@eazyg885 Python has type hints though. You can get some of the benefits of statically typed languages from having them present. But yeah, lack of proper static typing support, and lack of immutability as an option, are to me the two biggest weaknesses in the language. Third weakness kinda being the dependency management.

You should explain why Python returns a filter object. Does it have to do with lazy evaluation?

He said, “Able Prize here I come”😂🔥

Please don’t stop making shorts, your shorts content is the best I have seen 🙌🏽

@roiqk

Жыл бұрын

Then you have seen nothing

Using list comprehension for this would be more pythonic

@wintur2856

11 ай бұрын

I hate list comphrensions

@Rando2101

Ай бұрын

​@@wintur2856seems like changing programming language is the best option for you.

You check if it's divisible by every number up to it, but you really only need to check the previous prime numbers, since if it's divisible by a non-prime, it will also be divisible by its prime factorization.

You can massively improve performance of finding primes by searching between 2 and sqrt(n) since if we have two integers x and y such that n = x*y then it’s not possible for both x and y to be greater than the sqrt(n).

If you wanna use filter, go back to JavaScript! Pythonic would be, to use a list comprehension.

🤓*snorts* actually, you should have set the range to 1,1001 to print out the entire 1000 numbers instead of 999

@GoofyGoober6694

Жыл бұрын

@@MCRuCr it's ironic

@MCRuCr

Жыл бұрын

@@GoofyGoober6694 ok my bad its hard to tell.. there are just so many people complaining about his method of prime computation when in fact it is about the python language instead of a specific problem you can solve with it

range is non inclusive, so it gives you a list of numbers between 1-999.

very new to any programming, but i’ve seen a lot of the comments refer to this small program here as “quadratic time” i understand this refers to the time to completion of the program relative to the number of elements being processed. however, i do not understand which lines of the code are actually affecting whether the program is linear, quadratic, etc. if anyone is willing to help digest the concept with me, i’d greatly appreciate it. thanks!

This is terribly inefficient lol. You should just Calculate all the prime numbers ahead of time instead of calling this function for every number. Even with that slow function it'd be O(n^2) instead of O(n^3)

@b001

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! You're totally right, but the main point of the video was to show what the filter function does.

@maximebeauchemin2100

Жыл бұрын

@@b001 fair enough

@aroop818

Жыл бұрын

Hi mate, I am new to Python. Could you please explain how we can calculate primes ahead of time? Like applying modulo to the list of numbers of a specific range then appending them to a list and printing it? Please correct me if I’m wrong

I am mew to python and u are helping a lot! Thanks

personally I'd use a list comprehension myself primes = [num for num in range(0,1000) if is_prime(num)] print(primes)

wow filter function is a time saver, before I used to go for the slower solution : for num in nums: if is_prime(num): print(nums[num]) else: continue ty for the vid🎉

you can do the same function but better cause if you know that every prime number can be written in the form of 6n + 1 or 6n - 1 except the multiples of prime numbers: 2, 3, 5, 7, 11 where n is a natural number

With the Sieve of Eratosthenes, you don't judge each number like that: you create a list of bools you update to eliminate multiples of whatever's still prime. It's more efficient.

What VS Code color theme is this? I love it!

What font do you use?

Quick one how do you record verticals like these? Which screen recording app?

``` from math import floor, sqrt def is_prime(x): if x==1: return False for i in range(floor(sqrt(x)): if x%i == 0: return False return True ```

@Rando2101

Ай бұрын

The range should be range(2, floor(sqrt(x))+1) tho

Hey this is awesome thanks

The Pucci table

if you want to have a list of primes, use a sieve (e.g. sieve or erasthostenes or atkin) instead of this

Make the range go to the sqrt(num) instead of num, because that is the max you can go without the smallest and largest of the multiples switching. To check is 49 is prime, you only have to check up to 7 because 7*7 = 49 This changes from o(n) to o(sqrt(n)) If you can do this it will save you on at least one coding interview.

Can you please tell me what app you use ( i am pretty sure it’s vs code, correct me if i’m wrong ) and extensions/themes if you use any

Wonderful bro !!!

This is so much easier to do in R.

You could make it faster by defining a set where primes are stored and with each number check if it's a multiple of a prime in the set instead of the range [2,x). If it's not a multiple of 2 it ain't a multiple of 4 or 6.

The function is_prim can run til square of num to check if the number is prim😊

if you want primes in a certain range it is faster to use the Sieve of Eratosthenes (look it up) it is actually really easy

Python dev meets functional programming for the first time :-D

Sieve of Erathnoses. Thats the algorithm you use in production grade solutions

Good to check the potential factors twice to ensure we can display a nice "Loading..." screen 😊but in case you're looking for efficiency you could start by checking up to sqrt(n), because I'm pretty sure a*b = b*a for integers so if one of the factors is > sqrt(N), the other will for sure have to be below sqrt(N) and we can stop the primality check. I think you'd better show the use of a library rather than careless "tricks"

in one line prime_obj = [ a for a in range(1, 1000) if a%3==0] print(prime_obj)

This is a problem I was literally working on today. I saw a really similar solution on stack overflow

primes = list(filter(lambda x: len([i for i in range(2, x) if x % i == 0]) == 0, range(2, 1000)))

This is really nice, but you can't save shorts to your playlists so you'd have a library of useful tips and methods.

Alternative way that is much easier to remember: condition list comprehension

Noob question, but where is the value/argument for "num" being provided?

At every line for a sec I thought he missed; then remembered oh yeah it's python 🤣😂

Thanks for this. Can I cast it to a set or tuple and get the same output? :-)

@b001 what editor are you using?

@Sch8ill

Жыл бұрын

he is using vscode

pretty cool. You could also do list comprehensions which is native to the language. I believe it's the fastest native way to do this. Not sure though, as I'm a beginner in python lol