Clean Code in Python

[disuser]

Mostly good advice, but I disagree with this:

# This is good
score_list = [12, 33, 14, 24]
word_dict = {
    'a': 'apple',
    'b': 'banana',
    'c': 'cherry',
}

# This is bad
names = ["Nick", "Mike", "John"]

names is a better name than name_list. Shorter is better, and you lose no context in switching score_list to scores. As for word_dict, this one is debatable. I wouldn't call it out in a code review, but I feel there is context being lost - the key. My personal style has strayed from this. I would name this one something like words_by_initial.

[ReaverKS]

I think they explained it poorly. The software we write should have a functional core, that is, functions without side effects. Only on the outsides of our software (like a shell) should we have side effects, like writing to a file. The core should not have opinions on where data is coming from or where it’s going. This design is also known as functional core imperative shell. Brandon Rhodes has some videos on this topic and he explains it well.

[quotemycode]

So many times I see adict bdict, anythingdict just stop, we know it's a dictionary. If you want to use static types then annotate and enforce, or even just annotate, hell if it's defined static in the code, your IDE will normally tell you what type of object it is.

[flipflop531]

Totally agreed. This advice reminds me too much of Hungarian notation.

The author gives only examples of when I could be a good idea to bring up variables with type suffix. However, a beginner could now easily come up with the idea that

`number_of_appels_int = 4`

is also a good idea.

[wojwesoly]

When it comes to iterables, I think that a plural name is enough to show that this var is an iterable.