TPJ wrote: > I understand your POV and I really appereciate your reply, but I doubt > that I could simplify my code to make it small *enough* to fit in one > post and not look too long.
The pont of the exercise of taking non-working code and trying to cut away parts that aren't part of the problem is to isolate where the problem is. This is especially true in dynamic languages like Python, where problems usually consist of something not being what you expected it to be, but it's true in all other languages as well. Even if it means creating a standalone program that's a simplified version of the particular logic that's failing, this is good. It makes it easy for others to find where the problem is without having to tangle through your other (working) code. But in my view this is only the side benefit. The _real_ benefit is that a very significant fraction of the time, going through this exercise will actually help _you_ figure out your problem on your own. Taking a tangle of code that isn't working for reasons you don't understand and then pulling out threads to see where the problem is so you can show it to someone else to get help will usually allow _you_ to see where the problem was in the process. -- Erik Max Francis && [EMAIL PROTECTED] && http://www.alcyone.com/max/ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis God said: "Let Newton be"; and all was light. -- Alexander Pope -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
