On 08/06/2013 03:18 PM, Chris Down wrote:
On 2013-08-06 18:36, Dave Angel wrote:
This version should be a bit cleaner than what I've seen on this thread.
Our methods are almost the same, other than the fact that you don't use a
generator, and you do the length validity check during the loop instead of
preemptively, I'm not sure which I think is cleaner.
I'm more inclined toward using more lines of code to clearly express the reason
for the failure's conclusion, but either is perfectly valid and readable.
Thanks for the alternative :-)
I didn't actually check whether that exception is valid; it's probably
spelt wrong.
On 2013-08-06 18:36, Dave Angel wrote:
BTW, you have a bunch of other messages on the thread which are replying
to the invisible man, posts that aren't (yet?) visible. Since you quote
him without attribution, we have no clue who you're commenting about.
He is replying to me, but his client seems to not prepend any header to his
quotes. I am new to this list and am still held in the moderation queue.
Thanks for the status, I didn't think about the moderation queue.
Presumably the only reason he saw your messages already is you did a
reply-all instead of a reply-list.
DaveA
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
