Phlip wrote: [...] > Don't prevent me from using a technique just because others had > trouble with it. > I presume you also campaign against anti-lock braking systems (or at least don't use cars which have them - after all, anyone who knows how to drive should be able to brake properly, right? And even if they don't, *you* can, so you shouldn't have to pay the extra. Of course, if someone else happens to hit you because they *couldn't* drive safely you will happily give up your life).
> And if bar() == foo is the superior technique anyway, because the == > happens in chronological and lexical order after the bar() call. That's about the most specious piece of hogwash I've seen this week. Python doesn't make any guarantees about the evaluation order of =='s operands (unlike "and" and "or"). That's cargo cult programming right there. Readability is surely the only reason to decide how to write that "if", and I suspect most people would choose "if foo == bar()" for that reason, though the difference is slight. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010 http://us.pycon.org/ Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ UPCOMING EVENTS: http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
