Leam Hall wrote:
On 02/17/2012 09:26 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
There are two ways to think of a class. One is to hold various related
data, and the other is to do operations on that data. If you just
consider the first, then you could use a class like a dictionary whose
keys are fixed (known at
On 02/18/2012 03:39 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
Leam Hall wrote:
On 02/17/2012 09:26 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
There are two ways to think of a class. One is to hold various related
data, and the other is to do operations on that data. If you just
consider the first, then you could use a class like a
Leam Hall wrote:
I'm building a program that uses one of my own modules for a bunch of
formula defs and another module for the tkinter GUI stuff. There are
half a dozen input variables and about the same in calculated variables.
Is it better/cleaner to just build a global dict and have
Thanks Peter!
My concern with variables is that they have to be passed in specific
order to the function, and they may have to have their type set
multiple times so that you can perform the right functions on them. In
a dict you could set it on insert and not have to worry about it.
Thanks!
On 17 February 2012 14:04, leam hall leamh...@gmail.com wrote:
My concern with variables is that they have to be passed in specific
order to the function, and they may have to have their type set
multiple times so that you can perform the right functions on them. In
a dict you could set it on
On 2/17/12, Peter Otten__pete...@web.de wrote:
Leam Hall wrote:
I'm building a program that uses one of my own modules for a bunch of
formula defs and another module for the tkinter GUI stuff. There are
half a dozen input variables and about the same in calculated variables.
Is it
leam hall wrote:
My concern with variables is that they have to be passed in specific
order to the function,
Yes, unless you use keywords. You can invoke
def div(x, y):
return x // y
a = div(3, 2)
b = div(y=3, x=2)
assert a == b
and they may have to have their type set
I have no idea
On 2/17/12, Dave Angel d...@davea.name wrote:
Real question is whether some (seldom all) of those variables are in
fact part of a larger concept. If so, it makes sense to define a class
for them, and pass around objects of that class. Notice it's not
global, it's still passed as an
On 2/17/12, Peter Otten __pete...@web.de wrote:
leam hall wrote:
and they may have to have their type set
I have no idea what you mean by have their type set. Can you give an
example?
Peter,
The variables input seem to be assumed to be strings and I need them
to be an integer or a float
On 02/17/2012 09:06 AM, leam hall wrote:
On 2/17/12, Dave Angeld...@davea.name wrote:
Real question is whether some (seldom all) of those variables are in
fact part of a larger concept. If so, it makes sense to define a class
for them, and pass around objects of that class. Notice it's not
leam hall wrote:
On 2/17/12, Peter Otten __pete...@web.de wrote:
leam hall wrote:
and they may have to have their type set
I have no idea what you mean by have their type set. Can you give an
example?
Peter,
The variables input seem to be assumed to be strings and I need them
to be
On 17/02/12 14:10, leam hall wrote:
The variables input seem to be assumed to be strings
They are not assumed to be strings, they *are* strings. Users can only
type characters at the keyboard (the usual source of input). Your
program has to interpret those characters and convert to the
On 02/17/2012 09:26 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
There are two ways to think of a class. One is to hold various related
data, and the other is to do operations on that data. If you just
consider the first, then you could use a class like a dictionary whose
keys are fixed (known at compile time).
I
Leam Hall wrote:
I'm building a program that uses one of my own modules for a bunch of
formula defs and another module for the tkinter GUI stuff. There are
half a dozen input variables and about the same in calculated variables.
Is it better/cleaner to just build a global dict and have
14 matches
Mail list logo
