Function receiving and modifying a list without returning it [closed]
There is a question around here with a similar title, however it refers to something different.
Example:
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
print lst
>>> [1, 2, 3, 4, 2]
As you can see my issue is that it is not being modified. I've been told that is possible to accomplish this without adding a return statement or using Global. Would love to have some insight into this.
Thanks!
python python-2.7 function
closed as off-topic by timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin Nov 19 '18 at 17:42
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question was caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced or a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting." – timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
There is a question around here with a similar title, however it refers to something different.
Example:
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
print lst
>>> [1, 2, 3, 4, 2]
As you can see my issue is that it is not being modified. I've been told that is possible to accomplish this without adding a return statement or using Global. Would love to have some insight into this.
Thanks!
python python-2.7 function
closed as off-topic by timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin Nov 19 '18 at 17:42
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question was caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced or a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting." – timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
3
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
Suppose I replaced thedef
statement withdrop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised thatlst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mentionlst
at all.
– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
There is a question around here with a similar title, however it refers to something different.
Example:
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
print lst
>>> [1, 2, 3, 4, 2]
As you can see my issue is that it is not being modified. I've been told that is possible to accomplish this without adding a return statement or using Global. Would love to have some insight into this.
Thanks!
python python-2.7 function
There is a question around here with a similar title, however it refers to something different.
Example:
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
print lst
>>> [1, 2, 3, 4, 2]
As you can see my issue is that it is not being modified. I've been told that is possible to accomplish this without adding a return statement or using Global. Would love to have some insight into this.
Thanks!
python python-2.7 function
python python-2.7 function
asked Nov 19 '18 at 17:22
Moriel Mankevich
1
1
closed as off-topic by timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin Nov 19 '18 at 17:42
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question was caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced or a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting." – timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
closed as off-topic by timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin Nov 19 '18 at 17:42
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question was caused by a problem that can no longer be reproduced or a simple typographical error. While similar questions may be on-topic here, this one was resolved in a manner unlikely to help future readers. This can often be avoided by identifying and closely inspecting the shortest program necessary to reproduce the problem before posting." – timgeb, jpp, Austin, chepner, pushkin
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
3
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
Suppose I replaced thedef
statement withdrop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised thatlst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mentionlst
at all.
– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
3
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
Suppose I replaced thedef
statement withdrop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised thatlst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mentionlst
at all.
– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35
3
3
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
Suppose I replaced the
def
statement with drop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised that lst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mention lst
at all.– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35
Suppose I replaced the
def
statement with drop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised that lst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mention lst
at all.– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You need to call your function
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
drop_duplicates(lst)
print lst
[2, 3, 4, 2]
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You need to call your function
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
drop_duplicates(lst)
print lst
[2, 3, 4, 2]
add a comment |
You need to call your function
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
drop_duplicates(lst)
print lst
[2, 3, 4, 2]
add a comment |
You need to call your function
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
drop_duplicates(lst)
print lst
[2, 3, 4, 2]
You need to call your function
lst = [1,2,3,4,2]
def drop_duplicates(lst):
# Write the rest of the code for question 3a below here.
lst.pop(0)
drop_duplicates(lst)
print lst
[2, 3, 4, 2]
answered Nov 19 '18 at 17:26
Garvita Tiwari
453211
453211
add a comment |
add a comment |
3
You never called your function.
– timgeb
Nov 19 '18 at 17:23
Suppose I replaced the
def
statement withdrop_duplicates = operater.methodcaller('pop', 0)
. Would you still be surprised thatlst
remained unmodified, given that the definition doesn't mentionlst
at all.– chepner
Nov 19 '18 at 17:35