Cut the strings credit letter how to#
Cut the strings credit letter code#

This point has been made before on Obamacare, but the tendency behind it, the tendency to muddle and mask benefits, has become endemic to center-left politics.

Now it’s, “you didn’t used to be able to log on to a website and negotiate between 15 different providers to pick a platinum or gold or zinc plan and apply a fucking formula for a subsidy that’s gonna change depending on your income so you might end up having to retroactively owe money or have a higher premium.” Holy shit, thank you so much. They could say to you, “you didn’t used to have money when you were old, now you do. The reason they held Congress for 40 years after enacting Social Security is because Social Security was right in your fucking face.

Cut the strings credit letter how to#

You don’t have to go to a goddamned website and become a fucking hacker to try to figure out how to pick the right plan, they just tell you “you’re covered now.” And that’s it! That’s all it ever should have been and that is why - is bemoaning why it’s a political failure? Because modern neoliberal, left-neoliberal policy is all about making this shit invisible to people so that they don’t know what they’re getting out of it.Īnd as Rick Perlstein has talked about a lot, that’s one of the reasons that Democrats end up fucking themselves over. There are parts to it that are unambiguously good - like, Medicaid expansion is good, and why? Because there’s no fucking strings attached. And, in the interest of supporting a united front between liberals and socialists, let me start this off with a rather long quote from Matt Christman of Chapo Trap House, on why Obamacare failed to gain more popularity: The approach with the if clauses would take 26 if statements, whereas my approach will only take the same four lines except for the formula and the letter list.As Democrats stare down eight years of policies being wiped out within months, it’s worth looking at why those policies did virtually nothing for their electoral success at any level. Imagine we had a system that gives grade 'Z' for 0 to 9 points, 'Y' for 10 to 19, and so on, until 'A' for 250 points or above. But it has the advantage that it easily scales up to other categorization-by-number-range problems. It is not as easy to read as the one proposed by the course author. Score = int(round(score)) # make sure it's an integer So here’s my solution def getLetterGrade(score): Now we only need to make sure that the score does not go above 99 or below 50, because otherwise we would end up calculating invalid list indexes. Provided that score is rounded to the next integer, (score - 50) / 10 will return 3 (the list index of 'B') for precisely the values 80 to 89.

So we just need a formula that converts values below 60 to 0, those from 60 to 69 to 1, and so forth.

Cut the strings credit letter code#

While this code is very readable, I wondered if there’s a more mathematical solution, one that makes use of the fact that grades are assigned on a linear scale. It’s a very tiny overhead, totally negligible unless it is done a million times in a row, but still, it would be cleaner to use if.elif.else, because that only evaluates the comparison statements until it finds one that is True. While it’s OK and very readable, I have two points of criticism:Īn if.elif.else should be used in this situation, because if the score is over 90, the current code will still check all the other if statements, too.

The author’s solution, which we get to see in exercise 2.4, uses five if statements: def getLetterGrade(score):