[FRPythoneers] Python documentation and default expression
rob at pangalactic.org
Fri Mar 15 15:28:25 MST 2002
Mike Olson wrote:
This was the most concise reference. Thanks.
>>Along the same lines, what are the thoughts on using this type of test
>>in code? The reason I ask is that I was just burned on a test like this
>>when I extended a class to include a __len__() member function. What I
>>really wanted to test was that the class wasn't "None", and using the
>>above idiom worked well for that. At least it did until I added __len__().
>You should use what you really wanted to test. In the above, you said
>you wanted to see if foo is None so that should be your test. With
>python, you'll get all sorts of weird errors popping up other wise.
As I've just discovered. I think I will be much more careful about this
in the future.
If it doesn't do so already, this sounds like it could be a valuable
test in PyChecker.
>also, if your counting clock cycles,
>if foo is not None:
>will actually be quicker.
I've almost always used "if foo != None:". Is there a reason not to
write it as such?
More information about the FRPythoneers