This came up once before, and I think the reasoning is that a for loop without a break statement means the 'else' is redundant.
In your example, you can remove the 'else' and it would be functionally the same. On 12 January 2014 15:57, Kay Hayen <kay.ha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > often I write code like this: > > def _areConstants(expressions): > for expression in expressions: > if not expression.isExpressionConstantRef(): > return False > > if expression.isMutable(): > return False > else: > return True > > That is to search in an iterable, and return based on finding something, > or returning in the alternative, I specifically prefer the "else:" branch > over merely putting it after the "for" loop. > > This triggers the above message, which I consider flawed, because as soon > as there is a "raise", or "return", that should be good enough as well. > Basically any aborting statement, not only break. > > I wanted to hear your opinion on this, pylint bug, or only in my mind. > > Yours, > Kay > _______________________________________________ > code-quality mailing list > code-quality@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality >
_______________________________________________ code-quality mailing list code-quality@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality
