Dreaming of new generation IDE

Arnaud Delobelle arnodel at googlemail.com
Sat Feb 6 23:22:47 CET 2010

"Gabriel Genellina" <gagsl-py2 at yahoo.com.ar> writes:

> En Fri, 05 Feb 2010 19:22:39 -0300, bartc <bartc at freeuk.com> escribió:
>> "Steve Holden" <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote in message
>> news:mailman.1998.1265399766.28905.python-list at python.org...
>>> Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
>>>> Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> I prefer Guido's formulation (which, naturally, I can't find a direct
>>>>> quote for right now): if you expect that a boolean argument is only
>>>>> going to take *literal* True or False, then it should be split into
>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> two functions.
>>>> So rather than three boolean arguments, would you have eight functions?
>>> If there's genuinely a need for that functionality, yes.
>> So you want a function such as drawtext(s, bold=true, italic=false,
>> underline=true) to be split into:
>> drawtext(s)
>> drawtextb(s)
>> drawtexti(s)
>> drawtextu(s)
>> drawtextbi(s)
>> drawtextbu(s)
>> drawtextiu(s)
>> drawtextbiu(s)
> Note the *literal* part. If you (the programmer) is likely to know the
> parameter value when writing the code, then the function is actually two
> separate functions.

Thanks, I understand what Steve Holden meant now.


More information about the Python-list mailing list