readability concern(s):-
1
If it seems complex, first write a comment (in plain English).
2
Is the most basic refactoring improvement is any possible improvement in
attribute/variable names?
A mid-point between these two: if you find the intricate coding of
specific concepts awkward to read
On 2019-06-23 10:44, Arup Rakshit wrote:
On 23-Jun-2019, at 2:31 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 23Jun2019 13:26, Arup Rakshit wrote:
In the below code:
@classmethod
def find(self, id):
if isinstance(id, list):
rows = self.__table__().get_all(*id).run(self.__db__().conn)
> On 23-Jun-2019, at 2:31 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
>
> On 23Jun2019 13:26, Arup Rakshit wrote:
>> In the below code:
>>
>> @classmethod
>> def find(self, id):
>> if isinstance(id, list):
>> rows = self.__table__().get_all(*id).run(self.__db__().conn)
>> result =
On 23Jun2019 13:26, Arup Rakshit wrote:
In the below code:
@classmethod
def find(self, id):
if isinstance(id, list):
rows = self.__table__().get_all(*id).run(self.__db__().conn)
result = []
for row in rows:
acategory = Category()
In the below code:
@classmethod
def find(self, id):
if isinstance(id, list):
rows = self.__table__().get_all(*id).run(self.__db__().conn)
result = []
for row in rows:
acategory = Category()
acategory.__dict__.updat
Stefan Ram wrote:
The customer pays for the solution. The software
manufacturer does the refactoring for it's own sake,
because when it's a longer running project, the
refactorings will pay for themself.
The customer owns the source code (at least where I was). YMM
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Chris Angelico writes:
>>If the behaviour remains *exactly* the same, then it's a code
>>improvement (aka a refactoring), not a bug fix.
>
> Usually, one cannot observe whether behavior stays the same,
> beca
Googling "refactoring python code to create functions" I came to
https://wingware.com/doc/intro/tutorial-refactoring where the "Extract
Function/Method" does what I want. Is there a free Python tool that does this?
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
t;
>
> Year, this is a good example code for me to do refactoring.
>
> I created a pull request. This will be shown to my students.
>
> https://github.com/dotancohen/burton/pull/20/files
>
> I hope you favor this PR.
>
> --
> regards,
> makoto kuwata
> --
&
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> I think that we can help each other! This is my own code, back when I
> was writing Python like PHP:
> https://github.com/dotancohen/burton
Year, this is a good example code for me to do refactoring.
I created a pull request. Thi
(steps):
positions = move(positions)
yield positions
def draw(positions):
print(*('-' * pos for pos in positions), sep = '\n')
if __name__ == '__main__':
for step, positions in enumerate(race([1,1,1], 5)):
step and print()
Thanks Erik,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 6:53 AM, Erik wrote:
> (which is what I think you mean by "proper size")
>
As I explained at my first post, I'm teaching Python to novice programmers.
Therefore refactoring example code should be in the size what they can
understand.
I
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:00:36 +0100, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> On Thursday 16 Feb 2017 10:43 CET, alister wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:08:59 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
>>
>>> Antoon Pardon writes:
On reason to use this is for some easy "logging"
>>>
>>> I think it's better to use the actu
On Thursday 16 Feb 2017 10:43 CET, alister wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:08:59 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>> Antoon Pardon writes:
>>> On reason to use this is for some easy "logging"
>>
>> I think it's better to use the actual logging module. I generally
>> start a new program with print state
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:08:59 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Antoon Pardon writes:
>> On reason to use this is for some easy "logging"
>
> I think it's better to use the actual logging module. I generally start
> a new program with print statements but convert them to logging after
> there's enough
Antoon Pardon writes:
> On reason to use this is for some easy "logging"
I think it's better to use the actual logging module. I generally start
a new program with print statements but convert them to logging after
there's enough code to want to be more organized about it.
--
https://mail.pytho
On 15/02/17 21:53, Erik wrote:
process(data)
Before I get jumped on by a pack of rabid wolves, I of course meant:
process(d)
E.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hi,
On 15/02/17 09:36, Makoto Kuwata wrote:
I'm sorry that my explanation is not enough.
I'm looking for bad python code, not refactoring examples.
I think you need to explain what you mean by "bad". Do you mean
something like:
i = 0
data = ["bad", "exam
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any *just right* python code to refactor?
> In other words, I'm finding bad code example in python.
>
> (background)
> I'm teaching Python to some novice programmer, and
> want to show refactoring example to them.
>
> (required)
&g
On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 at 2:52:55 AM UTC-8, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 15-02-17 om 07:28 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> > E.g. http://code.activestate.com/recipes/580750
> >
> > does nothing more that define
> >
> > echo = sys.stdout.write
> >
> > Why not use sys.stdout.write directly? Or prin
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 12:37 AM, Antoon Pardon
wrote:
>> But a better way, in my opinion, is to
>> use your editor to search for:
>>
>> print(
>>
>> and replace with:
>>
>> #print(
>
> You don't seem to understand, I don't want to disable all printing, only the
> diagnostics. That is easier to do
Op 15-02-17 om 13:24 schreef Steve D'Aprano:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:49 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>
>> Op 15-02-17 om 07:28 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> [...]
>>> Why not use sys.stdout.write directly? Or print? If I saw somebody using
>>> this recipe in production code, in the way shown, I'd refacto
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:49 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 15-02-17 om 07:28 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
[...]
>> Why not use sys.stdout.write directly? Or print? If I saw somebody using
>> this recipe in production code, in the way shown, I'd refactor it to just
>> use print. There's no advantage to re
2017-02-15 10:36 GMT+01:00 Makoto Kuwata :
> Thanks Irmen and Steven,
>
> I'm sorry that my explanation is not enough.
> I'm looking for bad python code, not refactoring examples.
> I can do (and want to do) refactor bad code by myself.
>
> Is there any bad pytho
Op 15-02-17 om 07:28 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 07:44:03 +0900, Makoto Kuwata wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there any *just right* python code to refactor?
>> In other words, I'm finding bad code example in python.
>
> Try looking at the ActiveState website for recipes in Python. Esp
Thanks Irmen and Steven,
I'm sorry that my explanation is not enough.
I'm looking for bad python code, not refactoring examples.
I can do (and want to do) refactor bad code by myself.
Is there any bad python code (or project) with proper size?
# I found a lot of bad PHP code in g
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 07:44:03 +0900, Makoto Kuwata wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any *just right* python code to refactor?
> In other words, I'm finding bad code example in python.
Try looking at the ActiveState website for recipes in Python. Especially
look at the ones with negative ratings, but e
On 14-2-2017 23:44, Makoto Kuwata wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any *just right* python code to refactor?
> In other words, I'm finding bad code example in python.
>
> (background)
> I'm teaching Python to some novice programmer, and
> want to show refactori
Hi,
Is there any *just right* python code to refactor?
In other words, I'm finding bad code example in python.
(background)
I'm teaching Python to some novice programmer, and
want to show refactoring example to them.
(required)
* not good code
* not too large (for novice programmer)
Peng Yu writes:
> Is there such a good automated tool for python refactoring?
This sounds like a job for — Bicycle Repair Man!
Watch him extract jumbled code into well ordered classes.
Gasp, as he renames all occurrences of a method.
Thank You Bicycle Repair Man!
h
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Chris Angelico :
>
>> Okay. Start persuading "management" (presumably the PSU) that CPython
>> needs to be more modular, with different release cycles for different
>> components. Your first step is to figure out the boundaries between
>> t
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> You just gave a graphic vivid description...
> of the same thing Marko is describing: ;-) viz.
> A full-size language parser is something that you - an experienced developer -
> make a point of avoiding.
It's worth noting that "experienced de
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 7:13:49 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody :
>
> > IOW anyone who thinks that *arbitrary* complexity can *always* be
> > tamed either has a visa to utopia or needs to re-evaluate (or get) a
> > CS degree
>
> Not all complexity can be tamed, but what yo
Chris Angelico :
> Okay. Start persuading "management" (presumably the PSU) that CPython
> needs to be more modular, with different release cycles for different
> components. Your first step is to figure out the boundaries between
> those components. Get started.
Gladly, I don't need to do anythi
Rustom Mody :
> IOW anyone who thinks that *arbitrary* complexity can *always* be
> tamed either has a visa to utopia or needs to re-evaluate (or get) a
> CS degree
Not all complexity can be tamed, but what you can't tame you shouldn't
release, either.
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 6:05:02 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > 2. My students trying to work inside the lexer made a mess because the
> > extant lexer is a mess.
> > I.e. while python(3) *claims* to accept Unicode input, the ac
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> However, as a matter of rule, older code bases have been bloated till
> they can barely be maintained. That's when the management starts to
> listen to new ideas. Better late than never.
Okay. Start persuading "management" (presumably the
Chris Angelico :
> Alright. Can you rewrite all of those modules in three months?
The point is not to rewrite modules except as a fallback for a
hopelessly badly written module.
> And then there's the language itself. The cpython/Python directory has
> 58 .c files, many of which are closely tied
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 4:49:19 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> > The knowhow, vision and skill is apparently very rare. On the product
>> > management side, we have the f
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 04:04:44 -0800, Rustom Mody wrote:
> These are just specific examples that I am familiar with Chris' general
> point still stands, viz take the large and complex program that is
> cpython and clean up these messinesses: You will still have a large and
> complex program
I'm not
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:54 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Chris Angelico :
>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> So what do you do with a huge program?
>
> Modularize. Treat each module as a separate product with its own release
> cycle, documentation, apis, ownership etc
he ugly parts are compartmentalized, you have a better
chance at refactoring them -- or replacing them altogether.
Modularization is an obvious, but under-practiced, method of managing
complexity.
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 4:49:19 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > The knowhow, vision and skill is apparently very rare. On the product
> > management side, we have the famous case of Steve Jobs, who simply told
> > the engineers
Chris Angelico :
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> So what do you do with a huge program?
Modularize. Treat each module as a separate product with its own release
cycle, documentation, apis, ownership etc.
What is a reasonable size of a module? It is something you would
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:19:50 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> We need similar code sanity management. Developers are given much too
> much power to mess up the source code. That's why "legacy" is considered
> a four-letter word among developers.
When I started in this business, in the mid-70s, ther
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> The knowhow, vision and skill is apparently very rare. On the product
> management side, we have the famous case of Steve Jobs, who simply told
> the engineers to go back to the drawing boards when he didn't like the
> user experience. Most
Rustom Mody :
> On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 1:59:15 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> I've been there. I think the root problem is to have a code base
>> that's so large and complex.
>
> Bizarre comment... Are you saying large and complex code-bases should
> non-exist?
Why, yes, I am.
>>
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 1:59:15 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Ben Finney :
>
> > The author points out there are times when a code base is large and
> > complex enough that refactoring puts the programmer in a state of not
> > knowing whether they're m
Ben Finney :
> The author points out there are times when a code base is large and
> complex enough that refactoring puts the programmer in a state of not
> knowing whether they're making progress, because until the whole
> refactoring is complete the errors just cascade and
Rustom Mody writes:
> You may find this strategy useful:
> https://pchiusano.github.io/2015-04-23/unison-update7.html
>
> particularly the section "Limitations of refactoring via modifying
> text files in place, and what to do instead"
A direct link
George Silva schrieb am 15.09.2014 um 21:49:
> It's pretty useful. I use it for some time now and I very much like it.
> [...]
> The most powerful for me are the rename refactor and extract. Works like
> charm (no pun intended).
Dito.
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>>
7;t need the VCS menu. Most
> everything else looks fairly genertic.
>
> Except the Refactor menu. Before I try to do much/anything with it, I
> thought I would solicit feedback on its capability. Does it work as
> intended? I read through the PyCharm help sections on refactoring. It
its capability. Does it work as
intended? I read through the PyCharm help sections on refactoring. It seems
to describe a number of code refactorings which aren't available for Python
code. For example, I don't see an "invert boolean" refactoring.
How useful is PyCharm's
Well, a .pyc file would be a too blatant obfuscation, and people at my
job would get angry. I need something more subtle. So I need a
refactoring tool, preferably with which I can do scripting. These is
what I found up to now in the CheeseShop:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/bicyclerepair/0.7.1
On 03/29/2012 03:04 AM, Javier wrote:
Yes, in general I follow clear guidelines for writing code. I just use
modules with functions in the same directory and clear use of name
spaces. I almost never use classes. I wonder if you use some tool for
refactoring. I am mainly intersted in scripting
Yes, in general I follow clear guidelines for writing code. I just use
modules with functions in the same directory and clear use of name
spaces. I almost never use classes. I wonder if you use some tool for
refactoring. I am mainly intersted in scripting tools, no eclipse-style
guis.
Just let
Javier, 07.03.2012 04:29:
> I am looking for an automated tool for refactoring/obfuscation.
Sadly, there really is one thing that these two have in common: they modify
code while retaining its exact functionality. Apart from that, they are
diametric opposites. Refactoring aims at making the c
Hi,
(sorry for replying to the old topic)
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Javier wrote:
> I am looking for an automated tool for refactoring/obfuscation.
> Something that changes names of functions, variables, or which would
> merge all the functions of various modules in a sing
I am looking for an automated tool for refactoring/obfuscation.
Something that changes names of functions, variables, or which would
merge all the functions of various modules in a single module.
The closest I have seen is http://bicyclerepair.sourceforge.net/
Does somebody know of something that
Tkinter, etc., but now wonder how much I could size I could reduce by
> > refactoring--and therefore shortening--my code.
>
> Well that will depend on how much you refactor it, but frankly, unless
> your code is truly awful, this will be a micro-optimization. py2exe
> bundles a P
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> While I think 60MB for a basic calculator app is taking the piss, this is
> 2011 not 1987 and we don't have to support floppy disks any more. 11MB
> for a GUI app is nothing to be worried about. That takes, what, 3 minutes
> to download eve
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:51:07 -0800, CM wrote:
> I have an application that I was hoping to reduce a bit the size of its
> .exe when "packaged" with py2exe. I'm removing some Python modules such
> as Tkinter, etc., but now wonder how much I could size I could redu
I have an application that I was hoping to reduce a bit the size of
its .exe when "packaged" with py2exe. I'm removing some Python
modules such as Tkinter, etc., but now wonder how much I could size I
could reduce by refactoring--and therefore shortening--my code.
Is there a rul
Teemu Likonen wrote:
Please don't forget that the whole point of Lisps' (f x) syntax is that
code is also Lisp data.
It's possible to design other syntaxes that have a similar
property. Prolog, for example -- a Prolog program is expressed
in terms of Prolog data structures, yet it manages to h
Neil Cerutti writes:
> On 2011-07-12, Petter Gustad wrote:
>> Xah Lee writes:
>>
>>> it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
>>> don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
>>> intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisp
* 2011-07-13T10:34:41-04:00 * Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/13/2011 4:29 AM, Teemu Likonen wrote:
>> Please don't forget that the whole point of Lisps' (f x) syntax is
>> that code is also Lisp data.
>
> Thank you for clarifying that. Some Lispers appear to promote the
> simple, uniform syntax' as a e
On 7/13/2011 4:29 AM, Teemu Likonen wrote:
* 2001-01-01T14:11:11-05:00 * Terry Reedy wrote:
As a side note, the same principle of expressions matching operations
in symmetry suggest that majority of up are quite sensible and not
dumb idiots for preferring 'f(x)' to the '(f x)' of Lisp. In a
fun
On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 05:34:23 AM Terry Reedy did opine:
> On 7/12/2011 2:23 PM, gene heskett wrote:
> > Now, I hate to mention it Terry, but your clock seems to be about 126
> > months behind the rest of the world.
>
> Please do not hate to be helpful. It was a bad malfunction perhaps due
* 2001-01-01T14:11:11-05:00 * Terry Reedy wrote:
> As a side note, the same principle of expressions matching operations
> in symmetry suggest that majority of up are quite sensible and not
> dumb idiots for preferring 'f(x)' to the '(f x)' of Lisp. In a
> function call, the function has a differe
On Jul 13, 9:39 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/12/2011 2:23 PM, gene heskett wrote:
>
> > Now, I hate to mention it Terry, but your clock seems to be about 126
> > months behind the rest of the world.
>
> Please do not hate to be helpful.
Ha Ha. Cute one. Thanks
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/
On 7/12/2011 2:23 PM, gene heskett wrote:
Now, I hate to mention it Terry, but your clock seems to be about 126
months behind the rest of the world.
Please do not hate to be helpful. It was a bad malfunction perhaps due
to a run-down battery on a machine turned off for two weeks. I will keep
In article <4e1cf936.4050...@canterbury.ac.nz>,
Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Xah Lee wrote:
> > they
> > don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
> > intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
>
> Since 2.5 or so, Python has a built-in set type t
Xah Lee wrote:
they
don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
Since 2.5 or so, Python has a built-in set type that
provides these (which is arguably a better place for them
than lists).
--
Greg
--
Neil Cerutti writes:
> What's the rationale for providing them? Are the definitions
> obvious for collections that a not sets?
The rational is to prove that Xah is dumb.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
Petter Gustad wrote:
> Xah Lee writes:
>
> > it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
> > don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
> > intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
>
> In Common Lisp you have:
>
> CL-
On 2011-07-12, Petter Gustad wrote:
> Xah Lee writes:
>
>> it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
>> don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
>> intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
>
> In Common Lisp you have
Xah Lee writes:
> it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
> don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
> intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
In Common Lisp you have:
CL-USER> (union '(a b c) '(b c d))
(A B C D
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 02:08:02 PM Terry Reedy did opine:
> On 7/11/2011 11:37 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
> > watch the first episode of Douglas Crockford's talk here:
> > http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=crockonjs-1
>
> The link includes a transcript of the talk, which I read
>
>
On 7/11/2011 11:37 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
watch the first episode of Douglas Crockford's talk here:
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/video.php?v=crockonjs-1
The link includes a transcript of the talk, which I read
I suspect Lee likes Crockford because they both think they are smarter
than
I think the problem with so-called "forward looking" or "highest
level" languages is that they tend to become domain specific. What
Lispers are always saying is construct your own high level language
out of your favorite Lisp. Of course no one else will use it then, or
even discuss it, unless you
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
>
> it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
> don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
> intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
> (sure, lib exists, but it's a ride
Xah Lee wrote:
> it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
> don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
> intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python, not in lisps.
Ruby has them.
Intersection:
[2,3,5,8] & [0,2,4,6,8]
==>[2, 8]
U
I might argue that it isn't quite right (or politic) to call those who
resist technological changes "idiots" so much as to observe they often
have goals which cannot wait for the ideal expressive system. People
love python not because Python is the platonic programming language,
but because it doe
On 7/11/2011 11:37 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
it's funny, in all these supposedly modern high-level langs, they
don't provide even simple list manipulation functions such as union,
intersection, and the like. Not in perl, not in python,
Union and intersection are set operations, not list operations. Py
2011-07-11
On Jul 11, 6:51 am, jvt wrote:
> I might as well toss my two cents in here. Xah, I don't believe that
> the functional programming idiom demands that we construct our entire
> program out of compositions and other combinators without ever naming
> anything. That is much more the pro
Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
I have some code that currently takes four different classes, A, B, C and
D, and subclasses each of them in the same way:
class MyA(A):
def method(self, x):
result = super(MyA, self).method(x)
if result == "spam":
return "spam spam spam"
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 08:53:38 +0200, Peter Otten wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> I have some code that currently takes four different classes, A, B, C
>> and D, and subclasses each of them in the same way:
[...]
>> Any suggestions or guidelines?
>
> You could use a mixin:
Nice! I'll give it
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I have some code that currently takes four different classes, A, B, C and
> D, and subclasses each of them in the same way:
>
> class MyA(A):
> def method(self, x):
> result = super(MyA, self).method(x)
> if result == "spam":
> return "spam
I have some code that currently takes four different classes, A, B, C and
D, and subclasses each of them in the same way:
class MyA(A):
def method(self, x):
result = super(MyA, self).method(x)
if result == "spam":
return "spam spam spam"
return result
#
In article ,
Thomas Jollans wrote:
>
>(3) Why not
>
>try:
>import x
>import y
>import z
>except ImportError as exc:
>display_error_properly(exc)
>raise exc
Why not? Because that destroys the original traceback. Inside an
except clause, you should almost always use a bare ra
On 06/27/10 23:20, quoth GrayShark:
> Thanks for the help
> That was what I was looking for. All the rest, the arguments were
> unhelpful.
>
> Question: If you can't answer the question, why are you talking?
>
> I'm American Indian. That's what I was taught. We don't talk that much.
> But you
On 6/28/10 12:54 PM, rantingrick wrote:
On Jun 27, 10:20 pm, GrayShark wrote:
Question: If you can't answer the question, why are you talking?
Q: If you can't take advice without complaining, then why are you
asking?
I'm American Indian. That's what I was taught. We don't talk that much.
Bu
On Jun 27, 10:20 pm, GrayShark wrote:
> Question: If you can't answer the question, why are you talking?
Q: If you can't take advice without complaining, then why are you
asking?
> I'm American Indian. That's what I was taught. We don't talk that much.
> But you get an answer when we do talk. Ma
Thanks for the help Thomas Jollans. Just what I needed. I was wondering
what the:
__import__(name, globals={}, locals={}, fromlist=[], level=-1)
globals was (that was from the docstring on __import__. Odd, the doc on
www.python.org has globals as a list, not a dictionary). In any case, I
On Jun 27, 6:09 pm, Thomas Jollans wrote:
> > import Tkinter as tk
> > try:
> > import Image #from PIL
> > print 'Using high quality images :)'
> > except ImportError:
> > print 'Using low quality images :('
>
> As such, that still appears rather useless - the following code doesn't
>
On 06/28/2010 12:48 AM, rantingrick wrote:
> On Jun 27, 5:18 pm, Thomas Jollans wrote:
>> On 06/28/2010 12:06 AM, GrayShark wrote:
>>> I have a large list of package files to import. I'm using a try/except
>>> test to verify the import. Looks like:
>
>
>
>> (1) Don't. If you need the module, th
On Jun 27, 5:18 pm, Thomas Jollans wrote:
> On 06/28/2010 12:06 AM, GrayShark wrote:
> > I have a large list of package files to import. I'm using a try/except
> > test to verify the import. Looks like:
> (1) Don't. If you need the module, there's no reason to check for
> exceptions. Just let t
On 06/28/2010 12:06 AM, GrayShark wrote:
> I have a large list of package files to import. I'm using a try/except
> test to verify the import. Looks like:
>
> try:
> import abc
> except ImportError:
> print( "Error importing abc" )
>
> I've got many of those segments. I want to try a
I have a large list of package files to import. I'm using a try/except
test to verify the import. Looks like:
try:
import abc
except ImportError:
print( "Error importing abc" )
I've got many of those segments. I want to try and refactor this part
of the code.
Trying:
f
n179911 wrote:
I have a python script which process a file line by line, if the line
matches a regex, it calls a function to handle it.
My question is is there a better write to refactor my script. The
script works, but as it is, i need to keep indent to the right of the
editor as I add more and
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
