DL Neil <pythonl...@danceswithmice.info> writes:
> Possible solution:
> To make anything more than the trivial case readable, I think I'd put
> the list processing into one function, and the exception into another
> (except that this case is so trivial), ie
>
> if list:
> process_list() #the heading and for-loop, as above
> else:
> print( "Sorry...
(As an aside: It's best to avoid choosing names like ‘list’ that clobber
built-in names; your code examples are harder to read that way. I'll
assume a different name, ‘ipsums’.)
One aspect of that example I would prefer to avoid: It scatters the
handling of the list to different locations in the code. It's not
obvious from the purpose of ‘process_list’ whether that function should
be handling an empty list; this could lead to double-handling in
different locations.
An alternative to consider::
if ipsums:
for item in ipsums:
process_item(item)
else:
print("Sorry...")
An advantage of this is that the handling of the list is all in the same
place, where changing that logic later will be easier. The
‘process_item’ then just assumes some other code has decided which items
to handle; it becomes correspondingly simpler.
--
\ “Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe |
`\ or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.” —Arthur C. Clarke, |
_o__) 1999 |
Ben Finney
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
