Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!194.109.133.85.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.054 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.89; '*S*': 0.00; 'to:name:python list': 0.09; 'pm,': 0.11; 'wrote:': 0.14; 'expr': 0.16; 'intended.': 0.16; 'ops': 0.16; 'piraeus': 0.16; 'return.': 0.16; 'tue,': 0.20; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'received:209.85.213': 0.23; 'subject: -- ': 0.25; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; "doesn't": 0.28; 'solved': 0.31; 'perhaps': 0.32; "skip:' 10": 0.32; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.32; 'there': 0.35; 'point': 0.35; 'think': 0.36; "we're": 0.37; 'case': 0.37; 'should': 0.37; 'received:209.85': 0.37; 'apr': 0.38; 'proposed': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:209': 0.39; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'further': 0.62; '2011': 0.62; 'making': 0.62; '12:43': 0.84; 'presumably': 0.91 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <8abff237-5ccd-4eb6-85c8-cdc9e87520b7@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> From: James Mills Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:59:11 +1000 Subject: Re: Feature suggestion -- return if true To: python list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 18 NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166 X-Trace: 1302577180 news.xs4all.nl 81476 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:37021 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3021 On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Zero Piraeus wrote: > I think the point is that OP doesn't want to return *at all* if expr > is False - presumably because there are further statements after the > proposed 'conditional' return. If that's the case then we're all making assumptions about what the OP intended. Perhaps OPs should be more clear ? :) kid! cheers James -- -- James Mills -- -- "Problems are solved by method"