On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 6:21 PM Dan Sommers < 2qdxy4rzwzuui...@potatochowder.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/18 10:57 AM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:25 PM Dan Sommers > <2qdxy4rzwzuui...@potatochowder.com> wrote: > [...] > > But since you mention it, why is it necessary to ensure a successful > > operation? > > > > Is it so that when > > > > a,b,c = [1,2] > > > > fails, none of the variables a,b,c have been assigned to, and because > > of that, one avoids "rolling back" any assignment that would have been > > done without checking the right-hand argument first ? > > That's what I was getting at, but apparently failed to express clearly. > > Yes, there are use cases for a short iterator just not assigning the > rest of the variables, and for a long iterator using only what it needs, > but also explicit is better than implicit, and errors should never pass > silently, and other bits of wisdom learned from horrible debugging > experiences. > Aha, yes well you have head, tail, etc. I guess syntax could be added, so that a, b, @c = some sequence would initialize a and b, and leave anything remaining in c. We could then call this @ syntax "teh snek". 😂 ..I guess I haven't punished myself with enough Perl yet. Regards, Morten -- Videos at https://www.youtube.com/user/TheBlogologue Twittering at http://twitter.com/blogologue Blogging at http://blogologue.com Playing music at https://soundcloud.com/morten-w-petersen Also playing music and podcasting here: http://www.mixcloud.com/morten-w-petersen/ On Google+ here https://plus.google.com/107781930037068750156 On Instagram at https://instagram.com/morphexx/ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
