On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:55:07 -0400, Nathan Rice wrote: > This is one of my gripes with the dogmatic application of the "break it > into multiple statements" mantra of Python.
I must admit I don't recognise that one, unless you're talking about "not everything needs to be a one liner". > Not only are you forced to > use generators to maintain semantic equivalence in many cases, in some > cases a partial statement fragment doesn't have any intuitive meaning. > The result is that readers are forced to hold the value of > intermediate_variable in their head while reading another statement, > then translate the statement to the conceptually complete form. A > statement should be an encoding from a conceptual space to a operation > space, and ideally the two should be as similar as possible. > If a concept is atomic, it should not be comprised of multiple > statements. Perhaps you could give some examples (actual or contrived) of stuff where "breaking it into multiple statements" is a bad thing? -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
