range() is not the best way to check range?

[Steve Holden]

Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2006-07-18, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <bj_666 at gmx.net> wrote:
> 
>>In <1153198570.592653.203310 at h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, tac-tics
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Grant Edwards wrote:
>>>
>>>>for pete's sake use the comparison operator like god intended.
>>>>
>>>>    if 0 <= i <= 10000:
>>>
>>>I'm assuming you used Python's compound comparison as opposed to the
>>>C-style of and'ing two comparisons together to emphasize the fact it is
>>>god's chosen way of doing this ;-)
>>
>>Pete doesn't like to be called god in public.  ;-)
> 
> 
> Interesting point.  Does the phrase "for pete's sake as god
> intended" equate pete with god?  
> 
> It's possible that pete is not god and yet god's intentions are
> in pete's best interest, so something could be "for pete's
> sake" and "as god intended" without pete being god.
> 
> That said, "for pete's sake" is probably a just an cleaned up
> version of "for god's sake", so I probably did call pete god.
> 
No, actually you called god pete ;-)

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden       +44 150 684 7255  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd          http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb       http://holdenweb.blogspot.com
Recent Ramblings     http://del.icio.us/steve.holden