Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.wiretrip.org!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 0.022 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.96; '*S*': 0.00; 'loop,': 0.07; 'received:209.85.213.46': 0.07; 'received:mail- yw0-f46.google.com': 0.07; 'equivalent.': 0.09; 'terminate': 0.09; 'pm,': 0.11; 'def': 0.13; 'am,': 0.14; 'wrote:': 0.14; 'expr': 0.16; 'none"': 0.16; 'otherwise,': 0.20; 'tue,': 0.20; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'jason': 0.22; 'received:209.85.213': 0.23; 'subject: -- ': 0.25; 'chris': 0.27; 'function': 0.27; "doesn't": 0.28; 'hey': 0.29; 'argue': 0.31; 'second': 0.31; 'does': 0.31; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.32; 'idea': 0.32; 'from:charset:iso-8859-1': 0.33; 'received:192.168.1': 0.34; 'received:192': 0.34; 'point': 0.35; '-0700,': 0.35; 'function.': 0.35; 'think': 0.36; 'none': 0.36; 'received:192.168': 0.37; 'received:209.85': 0.37; 'apr': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'but': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'could': 0.39; 'received:209': 0.39; 'header:Mime-Version:1': 0.39; 'how': 0.39; 'would': 0.40; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; '2011': 0.62; 'show': 0.67; 'said:': 0.68; 'message-id:@localhost.localdomain': 0.74; '12:18': 0.84; '12:20': 0.84; '12:44': 0.84; 'death!': 0.84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references :content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dCZ+Z/aZQewSpHM1zEOepgTY0gpLjhKwSL6f7RxqdrE=; b=hpXuGByMF4rm4dtqYb3wXkyWEUGM0xjr0eysZ0rD5pJsImPS4vD4/JDkaYJkEq1Sq6 ef4d6otUaqT3BCFRb9G7Q7FPsWHhLOC2m41emJ8pqLrCMiUujofcoZW7euGf+GvfGXjF wc25NP0Mat0c+7rmYWu50RhR+WKYh8xas31JM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=LiqLNVfZyLLP/iLqihWjJ84rMyYUAVJyPDBnpWxCMeVRHBKf7EHgH6UP9bHD4mzIKN eSOTjG5+V4j//OXxTteNvh409vJsqsYa6XHzIYOWcOGOJERgfvTScuKC+negy6lTy0eQ Doy7b6MpRkPXvpkm4erDoovSNgmwwGgqcXFYQ= Subject: Re: Feature suggestion -- return if true From: Westley =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDnez?= To: python-list@python.org In-Reply-To: <9ed613bb-dfab-490b-9043-706b88846056@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> References: <8abff237-5ccd-4eb6-85c8-cdc9e87520b7@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <9ed613bb-dfab-490b-9043-706b88846056@bl1g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:45:11 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: 35 NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166 X-Trace: 1302648318 news.xs4all.nl 41114 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:53350 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3093 On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 07:58 -0700, scattered wrote: > On Apr 12, 10:05 am, Westley Martínez wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 12:44 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:20 PM, James Mills > > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Jason Swails wrote: > > > >> This is only true if n < 5. Otherwise, the first returns None and the > > > >> second returns False. > > > > > > Which is why I said: > > > > > > return expr or None > > > > > > But hey let's argue the point to death! > > > > > That's still not equivalent. "return expr or None" will always > > > terminate the function. The OP's request was for something which would > > > terminate the function if and only if expr is non-false. > > > > > Chris Angelico > > > > def bs(x): > > while not x: > > > > return x > > > > Am I wrong here?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > I don't think that this is equivalent. The OP's original idea doesn't > involve a loop, but this does - how could that be equivalent? Not OP's idea, Angelico's.