python: exit out of two loops
Question:
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
from the third loop how do i exit the current loop and go to the next value of for row in b: ?
Answers:
Untested:
inner_termination=False
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
<blah>
if break_condition:
inner_termination=True
break
<blah>
if inner_termination:
inner_termination=False
break
for row in b:
more_drugs = True
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if something:
more_drugs = False
break
if not more_drugs:
break
Python doesn’t have a control structure for breaking from two loops at once, so you need to do something manual like this.
If you have three levels of looping in one method then you probably need to rethink your design.
- Split your method up into smaller, simpler methods.
- Use a list comprehension and methods like
all and any to avoid writing explicit loops.
Doing either of these should mean that you no longer have this issue.
for row in b:
ok = True
for drug in drug_input:
if not ok:
break;
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if not ok:
break
if whatever:
ok = False
This one uses a boolean to see if you are done yet:
done = False
for x in xs:
for y in ys:
if bad:
done = True
break
if done:
break
This one will continue if no break was used. The else will be skipped over if there was a break, so it will see the next break. This approach has the benefit of not having to use a variable, but may be harder to read to some.
for x in xs:
for y in ys:
if bad:
break
else:
continue
break
try/except/raise, as suggested in @gddc’s comment, is one possibility. Another one is to “wrap up” the two nested loops into one:
for row in b:
for brand in (b for d in drug_input for b in brand_names[d]):
...
now, a break from the for brand nested loop will go back to the for row outer loop level. Of course, this works only when the code that is here replaced by ... does not need to see the drug name bound to the drug currently being examined. Is that the case for you?
I would consider putting the two inner loops in function and using return from there. Probably rethinking what you are doing and how gives the better alternative to that though.
Could you give your current pseudo code, input and output, so we could try to remove the need for the break in first place? We need to see where the loop variables are used or better still, what is the goal of the processing.
Exception handling beats setting variables all over the place IMO
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
try:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if some_condition:
raise StopIteration
except StopIteration:
break
Latest PEP I see requesting this feature is 3136 (and was rejected): http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-July/008663.html
Closest & cleanest thing I could see to what you want to do would be do the following (and since even type names are scoped, you could declare LocalBreak within the function its needed):
class LocalBreak(Exception): pass
try:
for i in ...:
for h in ...:
for j in ...:
if should_break(j):
raise LocalBreak()
except LocalBreak:
pass
for a in aa:
for b in bb:
for c in cc:
if c == a[b]:
break
else:
continue
break
Python supports for...else statements. else block is evaluated if the inner break is not fired.
If you have too many embedded loops, it might be time for a refactor. In this case, I believe the best refactor is to move your loops into a function and use a return statement. That will force-exit out of any number of loops. For example:
def example(self, drug_input):
ok = False
for x in drug_input["names"]:
for y in range(drug_input["number_of_drugs"]):
for z in drug_input["list_of_drugs"]:
# do stuff
if ok:
return drug_costs
Now, perhaps reformulating your logic like this is tricky, but I bet the refactoring will help in other ways.
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
from the third loop how do i exit the current loop and go to the next value of for row in b: ?
Untested:
inner_termination=False
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
<blah>
if break_condition:
inner_termination=True
break
<blah>
if inner_termination:
inner_termination=False
break
for row in b:
more_drugs = True
for drug in drug_input:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if something:
more_drugs = False
break
if not more_drugs:
break
Python doesn’t have a control structure for breaking from two loops at once, so you need to do something manual like this.
If you have three levels of looping in one method then you probably need to rethink your design.
- Split your method up into smaller, simpler methods.
- Use a list comprehension and methods like
allandanyto avoid writing explicit loops.
Doing either of these should mean that you no longer have this issue.
for row in b:
ok = True
for drug in drug_input:
if not ok:
break;
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if not ok:
break
if whatever:
ok = False
This one uses a boolean to see if you are done yet:
done = False
for x in xs:
for y in ys:
if bad:
done = True
break
if done:
break
This one will continue if no break was used. The else will be skipped over if there was a break, so it will see the next break. This approach has the benefit of not having to use a variable, but may be harder to read to some.
for x in xs:
for y in ys:
if bad:
break
else:
continue
break
try/except/raise, as suggested in @gddc’s comment, is one possibility. Another one is to “wrap up” the two nested loops into one:
for row in b:
for brand in (b for d in drug_input for b in brand_names[d]):
...
now, a break from the for brand nested loop will go back to the for row outer loop level. Of course, this works only when the code that is here replaced by ... does not need to see the drug name bound to the drug currently being examined. Is that the case for you?
I would consider putting the two inner loops in function and using return from there. Probably rethinking what you are doing and how gives the better alternative to that though.
Could you give your current pseudo code, input and output, so we could try to remove the need for the break in first place? We need to see where the loop variables are used or better still, what is the goal of the processing.
Exception handling beats setting variables all over the place IMO
for row in b:
for drug in drug_input:
try:
for brand in brand_names[drug]:
if some_condition:
raise StopIteration
except StopIteration:
break
Latest PEP I see requesting this feature is 3136 (and was rejected): http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-July/008663.html
Closest & cleanest thing I could see to what you want to do would be do the following (and since even type names are scoped, you could declare LocalBreak within the function its needed):
class LocalBreak(Exception): pass
try:
for i in ...:
for h in ...:
for j in ...:
if should_break(j):
raise LocalBreak()
except LocalBreak:
pass
for a in aa:
for b in bb:
for c in cc:
if c == a[b]:
break
else:
continue
break
Python supports for...else statements. else block is evaluated if the inner break is not fired.
If you have too many embedded loops, it might be time for a refactor. In this case, I believe the best refactor is to move your loops into a function and use a return statement. That will force-exit out of any number of loops. For example:
def example(self, drug_input):
ok = False
for x in drug_input["names"]:
for y in range(drug_input["number_of_drugs"]):
for z in drug_input["list_of_drugs"]:
# do stuff
if ok:
return drug_costs
Now, perhaps reformulating your logic like this is tricky, but I bet the refactoring will help in other ways.