Augmented Assignement (was: Re: PEP scepticism)
Paul Prescod
paulp at ActiveState.com
Sat Jun 30 23:55:35 EDT 2001
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Sat Jun 30 23:55:35 EDT 2001
- Previous message (by thread): Augmented Assignement (was: Re: PEP scepticism)
- Next message (by thread): Augmented Assignement (was: Re: PEP scepticism)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tim Peters wrote: > >... > > OTOH, if you're slinging mega-element conformable arrays x and y, > > x += y > > is much more efficient than > > x = x + y # creates a giant temp array > > and much clearer than > > x.add_in_place(y) It is much clearer in isolation but not when placed in the context of the rest of the language. It has different behavior than "x = x + y" which is what most people will think x += y means. Someone even posted on this thread: "I don't understand what's so complicated x+=y is the same as x = x + y". >... > > As usual in this debate, the participants aren't *themselves* confused about > it, they're worried about people much feebler than they are. In this > particular case, don't be so sure that isn't an empty set <wink>. I only became skeptical of augmented assignment when I actually ran into someone who was confused (other than the participant in this thread!). -- Take a recipe. Leave a recipe. Python Cookbook! http://www.ActiveState.com/pythoncookbook
- Previous message (by thread): Augmented Assignement (was: Re: PEP scepticism)
- Next message (by thread): Augmented Assignement (was: Re: PEP scepticism)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list