Roel, That was well put. Too many people complain about certain language features because of the way they are abused independent of whether or not they have any value when used properly. In that case it's throwing the baby out with the bath-water...and won't achieve anything since bad programmers will be bad programmers no matter how much you try and constrain them. And in doing so you manage to prevent good programmers from creating clear conscise statements that exactly express the logic that they are trying to impliment.
Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Roel Schroeven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:00 PM To: tutor@python.org Subject: [Tutor] Re: Are you allowed to shoot camels? [kinda OT] In my experience, such lists often go too far in that respect. I agree that fall-trough should mostly be avoided (except when multiple values should leed to the same branch). Ternary operators can certainly be abused (as demonstrated by much of the IOCCC entries), but can absolutely be useful when judisciously used. Many such lists seem to assume that developers can't judge such things for themselves. I think that if you have developers that can't do that, you have worse problems than a ternary operator here and there. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
