PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms
Dave Brueck
dave at pythonapocrypha.com
Tue Feb 11 11:58:42 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Tue Feb 11 11:58:42 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms -- Corner Case solved
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Robin Munn wrote: > OTOH, I'm not entirely convinced myself that it's necessary to require > the parentheses. Good style will demand that they be there, yes. And > I'll strongly recommend them to newbies who ask for help with their code > six months down the line. And I think that this attitude is key: any new language feature should include some "good style" guidelines that, while not enforced by the language, carry nearly the same weight. This is especially important when the PEP needs to list, for clarity and completeness, what happens in oddball use cases - a style section balances what's possible with what's reasonable. A lot of arguments against the PEP deal with odd abuses of the feature, but IMO they overexaggerate the risks there. Most developers with even a little discipline will avoid such uses, and if they don't care about good style then they will write sloppy code despite what the language encourages. If your company has a coding standard _and_ abuse becomes a problem, you can add it to your coding standard (with emphasis on waiting for it to really become a problem). At my current job we don't have a formal standard at all, but every once in awhile we'll make style suggestions to each other and it's the end of the issue. Not a big deal! -Dave
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: Alternative conditional operator forms -- Corner Case solved
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list