syntax for code blocks

[Kiuhnm]

On 5/1/2012 17:11, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> My way
>> ------
>>
>> with func(some_args)<<  ':dict':
>>       with when_odd as 'n':
>>           pass
>>       with when_prime as 'n':
>>           pass
>
>
> If you actually try that, you will see that it cannot work. You get:
>
> SyntaxError: can't assign to literal

If you had read the module's docstring you would know that the public 
version uses
        with when_odd << 'n':
            pass

> Have you actually tried to use these code blocks of yours? I asked you
> for a *working* example earlier, and you replied with examples that
> failed with multiple NameErrors and no hint as to how to fix them. And
> now you give an example that fails with SyntaxError.

The examples I gave you work perfectly. It's clear that you don't even 
have the vaguest idea of how my module works or, otherwise, you'd know 
what you're doing wrong. Again, the module's docstring is your friend.

> You have a bug in one or more of those callbacks.
>
> Of course you do -- all non-trivial software has bugs. The question is,
> how are you going to find it? You can't unit-test the individual
> callbacks, because they don't exist in a form that can be tested.

It's easy to come up with a solution, in fact those functions /do/ 
exist. You would know that if you had read the documentation or even my 
reply to a post of yours.

> So in this case, even though Python is slightly more verbose, and forces
> you to have the discipline of writing named functions ahead of time, this
> is actually a *good* thing because it encourages you to test them.
>
> If the callbacks are trivial functions, the Pythonic way is to use
> lambdas:
>
> func(some_args, {'when_odd': lambda n: n-1,
>                   'when_prime': lambda n: n**2 - 1,
>                   ...})
>
> although I would discourage that unless they are *really* trivial. But
> for callbacks of any complexity, they will need to be tested, otherwise
> how do you know they do what you want them to do?
>
> Your code blocks make unit testing of the callbacks impossible, and for
> that reason the Pythonic way is better.

Talking with you is a real pain. You're always partial in your opinions 
and this urge of yours to criticize other's work makes you look dumb or 
hopefully just lazy.
I can't stand people like you who don't even have the decency of taking 
the time to read the documentation of a project and just run their mouth 
without any concern for facts.
What I can't stand is that if I won't reply to your posts other lazy 
people will believe the nonsense you say, but I'll have to live with 
that because I've wasted enough time with you.

Kiuhnm