This might be obvious, but it the exception pattern not popular in python? On Sep 8, 2014 9:19 PM, "Gary Oberbrunner" <ga...@oberbrunner.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Kenny, Jason L <jason.l.ke...@intel.com> > wrote: > >> Ideally I always viewed this as a True False statement. I see you have it >> returning a tuple. >> >> >> >> I only worry that I have seen a lot push with certain python developers >> to say stuff like >> >> >> >> if not tool.exists(): >> >> # do something… >> >> >> >> This will not work as we will have a (True,””) or (False,””) return API. >> This seems to me to more complex to use and understand. At the very least >> east to trip up on. If we want an object returned. I think it will be >> better to define a error object that can be tested as True or False vs >> forcing tuple separation on returns values. >> > > Excellent point. The 'if not tool.exists()' pattern needs to work. I'll > rethink that. Maybe something as simple as tool.exist_error() which can be > called just after exists() returns False... > > -- > Gary > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > Scons-dev@scons.org > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
