Feature suggestion -- return if true

Westley Martínez anikom15 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 13 00:45:11 CEST 2011


On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 07:58 -0700, scattered wrote:
> On Apr 12, 10:05 am, Westley Martínez <aniko... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 12:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:20 PM, James Mills
> > > <prolo... at shortcircuit.net.au> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jason Swails <jason.swa... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> This is only true if n < 5.  Otherwise, the first returns None and the
> > > >> second returns False.
> >
> > > > Which is why I said:
> >
> > > > return expr or None
> >
> > > > But hey let's argue the point to death!
> >
> > > That's still not equivalent. "return expr or None" will always
> > > terminate the function. The OP's request was for something which would
> > > terminate the function if and only if expr is non-false.
> >
> > > Chris Angelico
> >
> > def bs(x):
> >     while not x:
> >         <modify x>
> >     return x
> >
> > Am I wrong here?- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> 
> I don't think that this is equivalent. The OP's original idea doesn't
> involve a loop, but this does - how could that be equivalent?

Not OP's idea, Angelico's.




More information about the Python-list mailing list