On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 3:45 PM, John Gordon <gor...@panix.com> wrote: > > In <87r3le1ht3....@elektro.pacujo.net> Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> > > writes: > >> Wouldn't > > > >> x < 0 or 10 < x > > > >> be even more visual? > > > > [SNIP] > > > > Another strike is that the code isn't consistent with itself; it puts the > > variable on the left in the first comparison, then swaps to the right for > > the second comparison. > > And on the other hand, it consistently uses the < operator rather > than swapping to > for the second comparison.
I would argue that the former consistency is more important than the second, mostly because my mode of thought is along the lines of: - Do I have more than 10 apples? (x > 10) or - Do I have fewer than 10 apples? (x < 10) rather than - Is 10 fewer apples than I have? (10 < x) or - Is 10 more apples than I have? (10 > x) Because the former set is how I think, the former set is the easier to understand. By no means does it mean I cannot understand the later set, but it takes more thought to parse the meaning. If a bunch of code consistently used the second, my mind would adapt to more easily parse it, but it would take a while to transition between the sets, especially compared to transitioning within a set. Chris -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
