While the 2nd approach is not wrong, the first method is considered more Pythonic. Many people don’t agree, but I’ve already put forward my points in a previous article on that debate.
Does Pythonic mean best practice in the python community or “good python”?
If “many people don’t agree”, how can they claim it to be “pythonic”? Isn’t that contradictory?
“Many” isn’t the same as “most,” though I don’t think there’s any way to know what “most” is.
But here’s my reason for agreeing w/ the OP:
not x checks both None and emptiness, which is usually desired
len(x) == 0 will raise an exception if x is null
with type hinting, those should be the only two reasonable options
It’s nice that it’s slightly faster, though performance has absolutely nothing to do w/ my preference, though it does have something to do with my preference for avoiding exceptions for non-exceptional cases.
Does Pythonic mean best practice in the python community or “good python”?
If “many people don’t agree”, how can they claim it to be “pythonic”? Isn’t that contradictory?
“Many” isn’t the same as “most,” though I don’t think there’s any way to know what “most” is.
But here’s my reason for agreeing w/ the OP:
not xchecks bothNoneand emptiness, which is usually desiredlen(x) == 0will raise an exception ifxis nullIt’s nice that it’s slightly faster, though performance has absolutely nothing to do w/ my preference, though it does have something to do with my preference for avoiding exceptions for non-exceptional cases.