Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #4586
| Date | 2011-05-03 23:46 +0100 |
|---|---|
| From | MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> |
| Subject | Re: vertical ordering of functions |
| References | <BANLkTinuFqsVEroQH6Tm=Q1r8UGxZFBGpQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi==eNrKxq=wwewaV-iAdYgJ_sQBSg@mail.gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1132.1304462821.9059.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 03/05/2011 23:31, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Jabba Laci<jabba.laci@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm just reading Robert M. Martin's book entitled "Clean Code". In Ch. >> 5 he says that a function that is called should be below a function >> that does the calling. This creates a nice flow down from top to >> bottom. > > I prefer to define my terms before I use them. Classes, functions, etc > get defined at the top and called down below. It's a stylistic thing, > but it ties in with what you would do in a debate or scholarly > document; and if you're skimming such a document and you don't > understand a term, you know to scan upwards for its definition. > > It's just a stylistic thing, you can do it whichever way you think best! > You also need to remember that in Python, function and class definitions are _not_ declarations, but statements which have the effect of adding a name to the namespace. If you try to call a function before the flow of control has seen the function definition, you'll get a NameError.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: vertical ordering of functions MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-05-03 23:46 +0100
csiph-web