On 2010-11-02, Emile van Sebille <em...@fenx.com> wrote:
> On 11/2/2010 10:58 AM Seebs said...
>> No, they aren't. See... That would work *if I knew for sure what the intent
>> was*.
>>
>> if foo:
>> bar
>> else:
>> baz
>> quux
>>
>> Does it look right? We have *no idea*, because we don't actually know
>> whether quux was *intended* to be in the else branch or whether that's a
>> typo.
>
> What is right is that there's no question that quux is subsequent to baz
> in all cases barring exceptions (and assuming no tabs intermixed)
>
> The apparent structure in python _is_ the structure, whereas otherwise
> you've got to count your ;'s and {}'s etc to determine and verify the
> structure matches the apparent structure provided by the programmer.
>
> Whether that's what the specs called for or not is always a source
> for bugs.
Yup. I've never found that the ability to write incorrect code that
_appears_ correct to be a good thing. Nor do I find the ability to
write correct code that appears to be incorrect to be valuable.
In Python, if the structure looks right, then structure _is_ right.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Now we can become
at alcoholics!
gmail.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
