On 26/10/2014 01:01, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
Dan Stromberg <drsali...@gmail.com> writes:
EG, if I have 3 mutually exclusive command line options, I'll do
something like:
if option_a + option_b + option_c != 1:
sys.stderr.write('{}: -a, -b and -c are mutually
exclusive\n'.format(sys.argv[0]))
That is an excellent illustration of why exploiting this accidental
property of True and False leads to obfuscated code. The above test
gives me no clue that we're operating on boolean values, nor that we're
testing for exclusive options.
Would it be more readable thus?
if len([opt for opt in (option_a, option_b, option_c) if opt]) != 1:
Because that's what it's doing. I think treating bools as numbers is
fine. Matter of opinion I guess.
ChrisA
Horrible IMHO, it just doesn't fit in my mind set. Still each to their own.
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
