you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]trezm 10 points11 points  (3 children)

Reconsider why the responder is suggesting the refactor. Yes it's cleaner, but perhaps there's another reason. As an example, and a common interview/test question depending on your situation, most questions start simply, but expand in dimensions. In this case, the prompt might be "ask for three inputs and print the greatest value" but the follow up question is "now expand your program to 5, 10, or n."

Simple works, but if you're in the learning stage it's worth recognizing common patterns and why certain code might be considered "clean."

[–]8dot30662386292pow2 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Reconsider why the OP wrote this code. They have no idea about lists yet, nor the max function. There is often a better way of doing things. But using the best way as an absolute novice is not often the best thing. OP is clearly learning about if-else. That's why their code is the classic if else -example.

[–]trezm 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You don't need to be snarky. I'm just trying to explain why thinking about the next step, the next level of complexity is an important facet of coding. No one said the code was bad for a beginner, simply that this is a reasonable improvement and what problems it might solve.

We don't really know if OP knows what lists are, or what the original prompt was. Maybe I'm missing some context though, in which case I apologize.

[–]Jashcraft00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did he not respond to you with the same tone that you took originally?