Is this a legal / acceptable statement ?

[bruno at modulix]

Philippe Martin wrote:
> bruno at modulix wrote:
> 
> 
>>Philippe Martin wrote:
>>(snip)
>>
>>>l_init really is a boolean parameter and l_value a value that _might_
>>>exist in a shelve.
>>>
>>>So I just want to have a parameter to a method so if the first value
>>>tested is false (l_init) then the second (l_value) does not get tested
>>>... because it is the second in the statement and only seems to get
>>>evaluated if the first one is true.
>>
>>s/seems to get/is/
>>
>>But this is a really unpythonic way to do things IMHO. Either use a
>>try/except block (probably the most straightforward solution), or, as in
>>Larry's post, test for the existence of 'l_value' in locals().
>>
>>My 2 cents...
>>--
>>bruno desthuilliers
>>python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
>>p in 'onurb at xiludom.gro'.split('@')])"
> 
> 
> Well, that was the question - I wanted to avoid that because I'm already in
> a try/except and do not like to imbricate them too much.

Then reads Fredrik's answer and this:
'''
Help on module shelve:

(...)

DESCRIPTION
    A "shelf" is a persistent, dictionary-like object.
    (...)
"""

What about :

if shelf.has_key('l_value'):
  ...

?-)

-- 
bruno desthuilliers
python -c "print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in 'onurb at xiludom.gro'.split('@')])"