Marco Bizzarri wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Diez B. Roggisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You should also consider using PEP8 style naming.
Diez
class FolderInUse:
def __init__(self, core):
self.core = core
def true_for(self, archivefolder):
return any([instance.forbid_to_close(archivefolder) for instance in
self.core.active_outgoing_registration_instances()])
Is this any better?
Yes. Now I can read it to suggest shorter names (I agree with FL here).
I would consider 'outgoing' for 'a_o_r_i' and perhaps 'no_close' or
'stay_open' or suggestions below for 'f_t_c'
The true_for name does not satisfy me a lot...
maybe because it is too similar to True.
Does one of 'locked', 'forbidden', 'untouchable' express the essence of
the condition being tested? I would consider using the same adjective
to name the test on instances and the collection of instances, or maybe
'x' and 'any_x'.
Anyway, I'm trying a good
naming so that code is readable, like:
specification = FolderInUse(core)
if specification.true_for(folder):
...
Any thought about this?
tjr
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
