> IMHO ... untested > > class LightBulb: > def __init__(self, on=False): self.IsOn = on > > def turnOn(self): self.switchIt(True) > def turnOff(self):self.switchIt(False) > > def switchIt(self, turnon): > if self.isOn==turnon: print "The Switch is Already %s" % (["ON", "OFF"][self.isOn]) > else: self.isOn = turnon #or alternatively =!self.isOn > > def __repr__(self): return ["ON", "OFF"][self.IsOn] > > > > > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > ON = "ON" > > > OFF = "OFF" > > > > > > class LightBulb: > > > def __init__(self, initial_state): > > > self.state = initial_state > > > > > > def TurnOn(self): > > > if self.state == OFF: > > > self.state = ON > > > else: > > > print "The Bulb Is Already ON!" > > > > > > def TurnOff(self): > > > if self.state == ON: > > > self.state = OFF > > > else: > > > print "The Bulb Is Aleady OFF!" > > > > > > > I've written code that looks a lot like that, and it's > > a perfectly acceptable pattern IMHO. I don't bother > > with the variables ON and OFF, though, as they add no > > clarity to simply using 'ON' and 'OFF' for the states. > > > > > > > [...] > > > The test portion of the code is actually longer than > > > the class > > > itself :-) > > > > That's usually a good thing! It means your code is > > concise, and your tests are exhaustive. (But that > > doesn't mean you can't also refactor your tests.) > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > ______________________ > > Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from > > someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 > > -- > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > > > -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
