missing 'xor' Boolean operator
Terry Reedy
tjreedy at udel.edu
Wed Jul 15 14:14:55 EDT 2009
Tim Golden wrote:
> I was pondering on this yesterday, and the only case I've
> come across in my code -- and it's reasonably common --
> is checking that one and only one of two params has been
> passed. I have code which wants, say, an id or a name
> but doesn't want both. It's hardly difficult to write the
> check even now, but an built-in xor would make it fractionally
> cleaner.
I think I would just have one parameter id_name or identifier so no
check is needed. This is a common idiom in Python where names are not
typed. Example: param 'source' is a string (with a file name to be
opened) or an already opened file. If you want two local vars inside the
function, that should be kept private to the function.
tjr
More information about the Python-list
mailing list