feba a écrit :
On Dec 12, 5:56 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
42.desthuilli...@websiteburo.invalid> wrote:
(snip)
I guess you wanted your first test to be:
if bank <= 9999:
...
(snip)
that's it, thanks! was confused with it being basically in a column of
all >= *.
I replaced it with
if bank <= 0:
print("You're in the red!")
quit()
elif bank >= 1 and bank <= 9999:
rate = 0.0060
elif bank >= 10000 and bank <= 24999:
rate = 0.0085
elif bank >= 25000 and bank <= 49999:
rate = 0.0124
elif bank >= 50000 and bank <= 99999:
rate = 0.0149
elif bank >= 100000:
rate = 0.0173
else:
print("What's this doing here?")
which also changes it to keep it from going on forever if you put in a
negative amount.
Good point.
Out of curiosity, would you still recommend applying
an 'else' clause in this case?
Yes, but I'd use it as a replacement for the last test:
# code here ...
elif bank >= 50000 and bank <= 99999:
rate = 0.0149
else:
rate = 0.0173
And finally, I'd simplify the whole damn thing:
if bank < 1:
print("You're in the red!")
quit()
elif bank < 10000:
rate = 0.0060
elif bank < 25000:
rate = 0.0085
elif bank < 50000:
rate = 0.0124
elif bank < 100000:
rate = 0.0149
else:
rate = 0.0173
I don't see how it could ever be
triggered, even if there's an error of some kind
It couldn't, indeed. Which FWIW is a clear indication that the previous
test ( elif bank >= 100000:) is redundant !-)
HTH
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
