On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:35:18 -0700, rantingrick wrote: > On Jul 11, 7:02 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this- > cybersource.com.au> wrote: > >> Come back when you have profiled your code and can prove that the cost >> of building empty tuples is an actual bottleneck. > > Did you even read this thread, i mean from head to tail.
Yes I did. > I NEVER said > building EMPTY tuples was the cause of my rant. The cause of your rant appears to be that you have nothing better to do with your time. But the *excuse* for your rant was that you had to replace: choiceIdx1 = None with: choiceIdx1 = () and followed with: Seems kinda dumb to build a tuple just so a conditional wont blow chunks! and My bin packer could potentially compute millions of parts. I do not want to waste valuable processor cycles building numerous TUPLES just for the sake of a conditional "condition"! [emphasis added] > My complaint (an oddly > enough the title of this thread!) concerns the fact that Python treats 0 > as False and every integer above and below 0 as True. Which is another > example of how *some* aspects of Python support bad coding styles. Yes, Python does support bad coding styles. The treatment of 0 as a false value is not one of them though. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list