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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #107526 > unrolled thread

Re: How much sanity checking is required for function inputs?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: How much sanity checking is required for function inputs? Michael Selik <michael.selik@gmail.com> - 2016-04-24 01:38 +0000

#107526 — Re: How much sanity checking is required for function inputs?

On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 9:31 PM Christopher Reimer <
christopher_reimer@icloud.com> wrote:

> On 4/21/2016 10:25 PM, Stephen Hansen wrote:
> >
> > Why not, 'color in ("black", "white")'?
>
> Checkers seems popular around here. What if I want to change "white" to
> "red," as red and black is a common color scheme for checkers. Do I
> change a single constant variable or replace all the occurrences in the
> files?
>

Why so many files? Python can easily support thousands of lines in a file.
If it's just one file any text editor can do a quick find-replace.

That said, it's easy to make some global ``red = 'red'``.

Some of these constants are shortcuts. Instead of writing slice(0, 16)
> or slice(48, 64), and getting the two confused, I write
> const['board_bottom'] or const['board_top'], respectively, when I want
> to pull the correct set of positions from coordinates list.
>

Why hide these things in a dict ``const`` instead of just making them
top-level variables in the module themselves?  ``board_top = slice(48,
64)``

> That said, if you're wanting to share constants across different parts
> > of your code, use a module.
>

Or just use one file to keep things easier. But, yes, I agree a module of
constants is appropriate for bigger projects.

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web