On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:02 am, Carl Meyer wrote: > On 03/02/2016 04:54 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:46 AM, <codewiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 3:44:07 PM UTC-5, Skip Montanaro wrote: >>>> >>>> if (some_condition and >>>> some_other_condition and >>>> some_final_condition): >>>> play_bingo() >>> >>> How about: >>> >>> continue_playing = ( >>> some_condition and >>> some_other_condition and >>> some_final_condition >>> ) >>> >>> if continue_playing: >>> play_bingo() >>> >>> or: >>> >>> play_conditions = [ >>> some_condition, >>> some_other_condition, >>> some_final_condition, >>> ] >>> >>> if all(play_conditions): >>> play_bingo() >> >> Those feel like warping your code around the letter of the law, >> without really improving anything. > > Not at all! Taking a series of boolean-joined conditions and giving the > combined condition a single name is often a major improvement in > readability. Not primarily for code-layout reasons, but because it > forces you to name the concept (e.g. "continue_playing" here.)
If you only use "continue_playing" in exactly one place, then it doesn't deserve a name. You wouldn't write: the_index = x + 1 value = sequence[the_index] would you? > Names are important! Too important to waste on every single-use expression. -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
