Feature suggestion -- return if true
tooscattered at gmail.com
Tue Apr 12 12:55:17 CEST 2011
On Apr 12, 2:21 am, James Mills <prolo... at shortcircuit.net.au> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Nobody <nob... at nowhere.com> wrote:
> > It should be abundantly clear that this only returns if the expression is
> > considered true, otherwise it continues on to the following statements.
> Uggh come on guys. We've been over this.
> You cannot make that assumption.
> -- James Mills
> -- "Problems are solved by method"
I'm puzzled as to why you seem to be parsing the OP's statements
different from everybody else. The only assumption that people other
than you seem to be making is that they are assuming that the OP meant
what he said. He *gave* a definition of what he meant by return? and
the definition he actually gave has the property that it terminates
the function only when the condition is true, whereas your suggested
translation *always* terminates the function call. I agree with
"Nobody" that the OP's intention was "abundantly clear". Your "return
expr or None" suggestion was not an unreasonable try - but it doesn't
provide something which is equivalent to what the OP gave. On the
other hand, your persistence in defending your original statement as a
plausible translation of return? after the difference has been pointed
out by various posters *is* starting to become unreasonable.
More information about the Python-list