On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 8:03 AM, spir wrote:
> Do you realize the inner func will be redefined before each call? Meaning in
> your case n calls x n outer loops x n inner loops.
> def f() ...
> is actually a kind of masked assignment
> f = function()...
That's true, but it is pretty inexpensi
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 07:28, Alan Gauld wrote:
>
> "Richard D. Moores" wrote
>>
>> to be put in a function. For convenience sake, I've put this new
>> function inside the one that calls it.
>>
>> Question 1: Is this bad practice? It works fine that way, but..
>
> No, but there are some issues to
"Richard D. Moores" wrote
to be put in a function. For convenience sake, I've put this new
function inside the one that calls it.
Question 1: Is this bad practice? It works fine that way, but..
No, but there are some issues to consider.
Denis has addressed some but one other is...
Reuse:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 05:03, spir wrote:
> Do you realize the inner func will be redefined before each call?
Oh, I forgot about that. Thanks!
Dick
___
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
http://mail.pyth
Richard D. Moores dixit:
> I'm working on a function that seems to cry out for some of its code
> to be put in a function. For convenience sake, I've put this new
> function inside the one that calls it.
>
> Question 1: Is this bad practice? It works fine that way, but..
>
> Question 2: If the a
I'm working on a function that seems to cry out for some of its code
to be put in a function. For convenience sake, I've put this new
function inside the one that calls it.
Question 1: Is this bad practice? It works fine that way, but..
Question 2: If the answer to Q1 is no, is there a standard p
