In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>the canonical idiom when you need such distinction is:
>
>_not_there = object()
>def foo(bar=_not_there, baz=_not_there, bap=_not_there):
> if bar is _not_there: ...
>
>Other unique objects can be substituted for the 'sentinel', but I prefer
>an empty "object()" because it has no other possible meaning except that
>of a distinguishable, identifiable sentinel. IOW, you could set the
>_not_there name to [] or {} or many other things, but that could be
>slightly confusing for the reader (since the other things might have
>other meanings and purposes) while 'object()' shouldn't be.
What's your preferred idiom when you're dealing with storable objects?
--
Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait
until you hire an amateur." --Red Adair
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
