From other thread: On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 9:50:13 AM UTC+5:30, Ethan Furman wrote: > On 07/15/2016 09:04 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > > > Just that suggesting that python's bool notion is straightforward is an > > unnecessary lie – especially to newbies. > > Python's boolean concept is as simple as it gets -- what is not > straightforward about it?
And to expand on my On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 11:18:48 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: > FWIW My belief: In general its nonsensical C's 0 is false; rest-of-universe is true is a mess Python increases the mess by making the false-y candidates also non-singleton This seems to work for container-like objects like lists,strings,sets, etc with None and 0 being somewhat elliptical analogues But when we allow __bool__ to be available for any and every thing and give it some implicit random definition, this is just plain nonsense. [What is the bool-nature -- aka Buddha-nature -- of graphs question remains yet answered] -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
