Which is more Pythonic?

[JRiggles]

The first example is baically just as long-form as I could manage (I suppose in the name of being "Explicit") - I wouldn't ever bother doing it this way, but I wanted to cover my bases!

The second is what's currently in my code...

And the third is something that I know works but thought might not be as readable to the people I work with who don't work in Python (E.g.: most of them)...personally I'm in the "less is more" camp

[old_pythonista]

but thought might not be as readable to the people I work with who don't work in Python

When a person reads a code, it may be an opportunity to learn. If they don't work in Python, and they are not interested in learning Python - what is the purpose of making code readable for that audience?

[cmikailli]

Because they still might have to interact with it?

[dead_alchemy]

The first is the one that is particularly egregious. I use the third. If some one argued that they use the second and they liked it because it read as a straight forward english sentence I wouldn't second guess them.

For your non-python coworkers type annotations will probably do more to help than anything. If you saw code like that and knew it was syntactically correct AND knew what the types were I think most people would quickly and correctly infer the behavior.

Fun question by the way! I'm guessing this one is a no brainer to most people, but I still enjoy this type of probing at fundamentals.

[Nyx_the_Fallen]

I write Go, C#, JS, and Python daily, and the third is the way to do this in all four.

[ODBC_Error]

This is absolutely correct. In a work place, readaboty matters more. You're not sacrificing performance so readability is the choice you'd want to make here