On 01/10/2015 19:18, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 08:31 am, Mark Lawrence wrote:
What is so "yuck" about that? What would you do instead? It seems like
the best solution to me. Easy to read, fast to execute.
I have to parse those damn brackets and then figure out the inverted
logic. Give me x < 0 or x > 10 any day of the week. When you're an old,
senile git like me, readability counts :-)
With the greatest of respect Mark, I don't believe that for a second. Your
sig line, which you have used without fail for more years than I can
remember includes the phrase "ask not what our language can do for you". If
you can understand that, I don't believe that you cannot figure out how to
go from this:
# x is within the range a to b
a <= x < = b
to this:
# x is NOT within the range a to b
not a <= x < = b
You're certainly a senile old git if you think we're falling for that
one :-)
Why do you think I never gamble at anything, it's a mug's game.
P.S. in case you missed it, you don't actually need the params, since the
precedence of not is lower than the other operators.
I confess that I did not bother to check.
Did-I-include-sufficient-smileys-ly y'rs,
Not bad. However after the big match coming up on Saturday evening UK
time one of us will possibly be putting up ginormous quantities of
smileys, matched by the ginormous quantity of grimaces from the other :)
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
