Feature Requests item #585915, was opened at 2002-07-24 06:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nnorwitz You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=355470&aid=585915&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Rejected Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Thomas Leonard (tal197) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: assert return values Initial Comment: It would be nice to write: def root(x): assert x >= 0 assert return >= 0 ... or def get_path(foo): if foo is None: return None assert return is not None ... and have the 'return' assertion checked when the function exits. 'return' is already a reserved keyword so the syntax doesn't introduce any incompatibility. This might make functions more self-documenting, since asserts at the end / in the middle tend to get lost. Even if the assert goes at the end, it's still clearer, eg: def foo(): ... assert min <= return <= max return bar(min, max) vs def foo(): ... tmp = bar(min, max) assert min <= tmp <= max return tmp Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz) Date: 2007-03-15 22:48 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=33168 Originator: NO Raymond pretty much summed up my opinion. :-) This could only happen with a PEP and still doesn't seem likely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) Date: 2003-06-30 23:41 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=80475 Yuck! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Brett Cannon (bcannon) Date: 2003-05-12 19:32 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=357491 Wouldn't this require turning 'return' into an expression instead of a statement? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one) Date: 2002-07-24 08:42 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=31435 Re-opened but moved to the Feature Request tracker (it's certainly not "a bug", but there's no rule against asking for new features either, provided they're in the right place). I don't believe there's any control flow in the suggestion, just that the name "return" be taken as being bound, in assert statements, to the possibly anonyous return expression. Eiffel does something very much like this for the benefit of expressing post-conditions. I certainly agree this way of spelling it in Python has problems, though, and a PEP would be in order. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jeremy Hylton (jhylton) Date: 2002-07-24 08:06 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=31392 I don't think this is a great feature. It seems like control flow via yield or return could easily be overlooked if it's inside an assert statement. Regardless of whether I like the idea, the SF bug tracker isn't the right place to make this suggestion. The right thing to do is write a PEP describing the feature in detail, then come up with a patch to implement it. If that's too much work, but you really like the idea, you could try to drum up interest on comp.lang.python. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=355470&aid=585915&group_id=5470 _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
