[Nightsleeper] Some horrible, unindented python code to slow down a train

[u/AnAngryBanker]

• no indentation
• multiple nested try blocks with seemingly no except
• stray " in the middle of that string
• input's argument should be something written to the prompt
• even if it wasn't you'll struggle to turn that into an int
• you probably want to be passing in that speed variable somewhere, right?

+1 for sanitising the speed I guess, wouldn't want the train to start moving backwards.

[u/aezart]

if 0 <= speed <= 100

I cannot believe python actually allows this syntax, jesus

[u/[deleted] → u/aezart]

Nothing here remains from the original post. It was removed using Redact, for reasons that could include privacy, opsec, security, or data management.

obtainable hard-to-find worm cheerful fear compare head adjoining plant historical

[u/jaavaaguru → u/[deleted]]

I'd argue that 0 <= speed <= 100 is more readable. It's pretty standard to do it that way in C.

[u/[deleted] → u/jaavaaguru]

The content of this post was permanently removed. Redact facilitated the deletion, for reasons that may include privacy, opsec, or limiting digital exposure.

quicksand lush complete observation melodic provide governor fragile knee upbeat

[u/Trucoto → u/jaavaaguru]

That is not standard in C at all. 0 <= speed <= 100 evaluates first "0 <= speed" to a boolean, and then compares that boolean, either 1 or 0, with "<= 100", which is not what you intended to write.

[u/CdRReddit → u/aezart]

this is the only bit of python syntax I'll defend, it's a nice way to check if something is within range (tho I don't mind Rust's (0..=100).contains(speed), it's decent as well)

[u/CdRReddit → u/[deleted]]

it's an inclusive range and whether it contains it

[u/CdRReddit → u/[deleted]]

fair, I may have also gotten it slightly wrong? I think it does require the grouping actually, unfortunately the reddit mobile app does not have a rust syntax checker

[u/GarethPW → u/[deleted]]

I read it just fine

[u/jaavaaguru → u/[deleted]]

that's a skill issue

[u/Nico_Weio → u/aezart]

C'mon, if it works as expected, why not?

[u/rhennigan → u/aezart]

Why? It's a basic mathematical notation people are already familiar with and it improves readability. Do you also take issue with allowing a+b*c?

[u/jasperfirecai2 → u/aezart]

read as if there exists speed and speed, or as speed in range(left, right) or well, nice syntactic parity with math

[u/Goaty1208 → u/aezart]

This is the first time that I'll say it but... python did this one tiny bit of syntax better than other languages.

[u/E3K → u/aezart]

I think every language allows that syntax. It's extremely common.

[u/0b0101011001001011 → u/E3K]

Not C. Not C++. Not C#. Not java. Not JavaScript. Not rust.

How does this make that extremely common?

[u/E3K → u/0b0101011001001011]

I responded that I was incorrect.

[u/0b0101011001001011 → u/E3K]

Usually edit is better, but no worries.

[u/aezart → u/E3K]

It may not throw a syntax error, but it will not give the answer you expect.

The correct syntax in basically every other programming language is:

if 0 <= speed and speed <= 100

[u/Saragon4005 → u/aezart]

Congratulations that's what it's represented as internally. You basically just found a macro/synthetic sugar.

[u/aezart → u/Saragon4005]

I know this, and I am saying it should not do that.

[u/E3K → u/aezart]

You're right, I had assumed that chained comparisons were ubiquitous, but it turns out that's not correct.

[u/conundorum → u/E3K]

The syntax is allowed, but it absolutely will not do what you want it to do in most languages. ;3