On Oct 8, 6:31 pm, Roy Smith <r...@panix.com> wrote: > In article <87ehyn8xlp....@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>, > Alain Ketterlin <al...@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> wrote: > > > Sure, but note that you can also reformulate != using not and ==, < > > using not and >=, etc. Operators like "not in" and "is not" should > > really be considered single tokens, even though they seem to use "not". > > And I think they are really convenient. > > If you want to take it one step further, all the boolean operators can > be derived from nand (the dualists would insist on using nor). ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ???? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" ... Alain Ketterlin
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in&q... Alec Taylor
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" ... Nobody
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in&q... Chris Angelico
- Re: Usefulness of the "not ... Ian Kelly
- Re: Usefulness of the "not ... Terry Reedy
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in&q... Nobody
- Re: Usefulness of the "not ... Chris Angelico
- Re: Usefulness of the "not ... Alec Taylor
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in&q... Alexander Kapps
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator rusi
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" oper... Chris Angelico
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" oper... Roy Smith
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator candide
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator Chris Angelico
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator DevPlayer
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator Steven D'Aprano
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" oper... DevPlayer
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator candide
- Re: Usefulness of the "not in" operator Thorsten Kampe