> In Python, there does not seem to be an easy way to have
> functions return multiple values except it can return a
> list such as: strHostname, nPortNumber, status =
> get_network_info (strIpAddress, strHostname, nPortNumber)
> Am I missing something obvious? Is there a better, or
> more standard way to return values from functions?
This *is* the "better" and "standard" way to do it. There
are *worse* ways to emulate C/C++ if you want, but it takes
being *more* obtruse. Because certain objects are mutable,
nothing[*] prevents you from doing something like
x = []
def foo(q):
x.append(42)
foo(x)
print repr(x)
which will return that you've added "42" to your list.
However, it's ugly and relies on side effects.
They Python way (that you deride) is much clearer. Your
input goes in the parameters, and your output gets assigned
the way functions are intended to work. Unambiguous.
I don't expect to call a sine function, and get the result
in the parameter; rather I expect to get it as the result of
the function. Okay...unless I'm working in Assembly
language (but that's one of many reasons *why* I choose
Python ;)
Just a few thoughts,
-tkc
[*] nothing other than being given dirty looks by folks
reading your code...
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
