On Jan 30, 11:51 am, Gerald Britton <gerald.brit...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...] > that I might confuse with the first. To make it look better I might do this: > > _o = some.deeply.nested.object > _o.method(_o.value) > > which is fine, I suppose. It is very fine. And you "supposed" correctly! > Then, putting on my company hat, I remembered that, from VBA, you could do > this: > > with some.deeply.nested.object > .method(.value) > end with > > I like the structure of this, since the subordinate block can be > indented, which makes it stand out. Also, it avoids temporary > variables. Yes it is a good idea! Well forgetting the horrendous VBA syntax this is. I brought this up many moons back as a feature request: Local Blocks. Here is how a pythonic local block would look with this as localvar: localvar.do_something() > So, I was thinking of how to get close to this in Python. I came up > with two approaches: > > 1. > > _o = some.deeply.nested.object > if 1: > _o.method(_o.value) bad idea! > 2. > > for _o in [some.deeply.nested.object]: > _o.method(_o.value) even worse idea! > I have a couple of questions: > > 1. If you had to choose between approaches 1 and 2, which one would > you go for, and why? neither! Stick with the original. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list