On Mar 5, 10:19 am, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 5, 10:53 am, Pete Emerson <pemer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for your response, further questions inline. > > > On Mar 4, 11:07 am, Tim Wintle <tim.win...@teamrubber.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 10:39 -0800, Pete Emerson wrote: > > > > I am looking for advice along the lines of "an easier way to do this" > > > > or "a more python way" (I'm sure that's asking for trouble!) or > > > > "people commonly do this instead" or "here's a slick trick" or "oh, > > > > interesting, here's my version to do the same thing". > > > > (1) I would wrap it all in a function > > > > def main(): > > > # your code here > > > > if __name__ == "__main__": > > > main() > > > Is this purely aesthetic reasons, or will I appreciate this when I > > write my own modules, or something else? > > Suppose the above code is in mymodule.py. By wrapping main() you can: > 1. Have another module do: > import mymodule > ... (so some stuff, perhaps munge sys.argv) > mymodule.main() > 2. If mymodule has a small function in it, someone else can import it > and call that function > 3. You can run pylint, pychecker and other source-code checkers that > need to be able to import your module to check it (I wouldn't be > surprised if recent versions of one or the other of those don't > require imports, and some checkers like pyflakes certainly don't). > 4. You can easily have a unit tester call into the module > > etc. > > > > (2) PEP8 (python style guidelines) suggests one import per line > > > > (3) I'd use four spaces as tab width > > +1 on both; it's good to get into the habit of writing standard- > looking Python code.
Agreed, noted, and appreciated, with the caveat that using spaces instead of tabs might border on an emacs vs. vi flamewar in some circles. I personally will use spaces going forward. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
