On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 12:37:14 AM UTC-4, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 4:24:24 PM UTC+12, Michael Selik wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:53 PM Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > > > > > Example from <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/Truchet-612095093>, > > > concisely expressing a complex drawing sequence: > > > > > > (g > > > .move_to((p1 + p2a) / 2) > > > .line_to(p1 + (p2 - p1) * frac) > > > .line_to((p1 + p1a) / 2) > > > .stroke() > > > .move_to((p2 + p2a) / 2) > > > .line_to(p2 + (p1 - p2) * frac) > > > .line_to((p2 + p1a) / 2) > > > .stroke() > > > ) > > > > Wouldn't that look nicer with the ``g`` repeated on every line, no extra > > indentation, and no extraneous parentheses? > > > > g.move_to((p1 + p2a) / 2) > > g.line_to(p1 + (p2 - p1) * frac) > > g.line_to((p1 + p1a) / 2) > > g.stroke() > > g.move_to((p2 + p2a) / 2) > > g.line_to(p2 + (p1 - p2) * frac) > > g.line_to((p2 + p1a) / 2) > > g.stroke() > > Clearly, no.
To me, it's a toss-up. The chained version is nice in that it removes the repetition of "g". But the unchained version is more explicit, and avoids the awkward parenthesis. I think I would lean toward the unchained version. Clearly tastes can differ. --Ned. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
