KnowledgeHub
Questions
Tags
Users
Search
Alex Rivera
|
Logout
Edit Question
Title
Body
Is there a better way to write the following: row_counter = 0 for item in iterable_sequence: # do stuff with the item counter += 1 if not row_counter: # handle the empty-sequence-case Please keep in mind that I can't use len(iterable_sequence) because 1) not all sequences have known lengths; 2) in some cases calling len() may trigger loading of the sequence's items into memory (as the case would be with sql query results). The reason I ask is that I'm simply curious if there is a way to make above more concise and idiomatic. What I'm looking for is along the lines of: for item in sequence: #process item *else*: #handle the empty sequence case (assuming "else" here worked only on empty sequences, which I know it doesn't)
Tags (comma-separated)
Save Edits
Cancel