> So this call will always try to round None(the default return value) > And of course it produces no output since it prints nothing. > > Are you sure that's actually what is in the book?
No. That's very much why I wanted a reference to the original source of the problem. Scott attributed too much to the book when he presented the problem. In the original content, http://greenteapress.com/thinkpython/html/thinkpython008.html#toc81 it simply presents a running dialogue exploring the idea of computing square roots iteratively, culminating in a toplevel for-loop that simply prints out its improving guess. There is no function there. This is why we want to be a bit more careful when saying "The book said this..." following up with a paraphrase, because sometimes we can get the paraphrasing wrong. Similarly issues occur when one is presenting error message content and asking for debugging advice. Pointing to primary sources is usually a good idea, especially when debugging or trying to get at root causes. Let's head-off this sort of confusion quickly next time. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor