On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:53:10 -0800 (PST), Aaron P
<transreduction...@gmail.com> declaimed the following:
Late response here, and the concept may have been covered in
skimmed-over posts..
>I occasionally run across something like:
>
>for idx, thing in enumerate(things):
> if idx == 103:
> continue
> do_something_with(thing)
>
For this example, I'd probably reverse the condition.
if idx != 103:
do_something_with(thing)
and hence completely drop the "continue" -- after all, if idx is 103, the
if statement falls through, and the end of the loop acts as an implicit
"continue"
OTOH: if the "if/continue" is buried in four or five layers of
conditionals, it could be cleaner than trying to configure the conditionals
to have a chained exit.
--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN
wlfr...@ix.netcom.com http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
