Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #86546

Re: Python Worst Practices

Show key headers only | View raw

----- Original Message -----

> From: Simon Ward <simon+python@bleah.co.uk>
> To: 
> Cc: "python-list@python.org" <python-list@python.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Python Worst Practices
> 
> 
> 
> On 25 February 2015 21:24:37 GMT+00:00, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Mark Lawrence
>> <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>  http://www.slideshare.net/pydanny/python-worst-practices
>>> 
>>>  Any that should be added to this list?  Any that be removed as not
>> that bad?
>> 
>> Remove the complaint about id. It's an extremely useful variable name,
>> and you hardly ever need the function.
> 
> You can add one character and avoid the conflict with "id_" and not 
> require anyone else maintaining the code to think about it. As rare as the 
> conflict is, I think the ease of avoiding it makes the extra character a 
> practical defensive technique. I agree it is not a worst case. 
> 


I sometimes do:

import sys, functools
if sys.version_info.major > 2:

    bytez = functools.partial(bytes, encoding="utf-8")
else:
    bytez = bytes  # nog encoding param in python 2.


I bitez you when you shadow 'bytes' (I can't remember when I couldn't use the functools.partial object), though it often works. Much easier to use 'bytez' or 'bytes_'. It is annoying to 'unshadow' your code and confusing for others who might read your code.

Albert-Jan

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Python Worst Practices Albert-Jan Roskam <fomcl@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-26 21:05 +0000

csiph-web