[moedersmooiste]

In college they taught me that every line of code should do one thing and one thing only. So doing both a test and an assignment on one line would not be prefered over the first example(split over multiple lines). I don't have a lot of experience with programming so for now I do what I was taught. :)

[userbinator]

that every line of code should do one thing and one thing only

Taking that at face value results in something like Asm written in a high-level language: very short lines with not much on each one, and it's a pain to read and understand because you have to scroll two pages to see what could be accomplished in a dozen lines. I've seen code written in that style and it was not easy to work with. (What often goes along with that, "every function 'should do one thing and one thing only'", is even worse when taken to its logical conclusion --- it turns lots of scrolling into lots of jumping around.)

I don't have a lot of experience with programming so for now I do what I was taught.

Reading the code for lots of other successful open-source software will probably tell you far more useful things about how to write code than the "indoctrination" that passes for teaching these days. I'd recommend older codebases; the newer ones tend to unfortunately show the same bad habits due to the reasons above.

[sidlls]

The code is doing one thing: assigning the result of a boolean expression. It's not different in structure from, say, `x = a + b`.

[bryanrasmussen]

it's sort of an interesting problem in intention - if the reason why the expression

"isDone = isDelivered and isNotified" was written is because the programmer saw "if isDelivered and isNotified: isDone = True else: isDone = false;"

and thought I can improve that, then what they have done is managed to wrap the checking and assignment into one expression, they are logically now doing two things in the one line - it just so happens that they can do that because one of those things was not really necessary to do.