Re: [Python-3000] XOR and NOT operator syntax

2007-12-23 Thread Martin v. Löwis
> I don't see a reason why and, or, not are valid python > keywords but xor is not. Can this be added in python 3.0 for completeness? It's already there; it's spelled "!=". Regards, Martin ___ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.

Re: [Python-3000] XOR and NOT operator syntax

2007-12-22 Thread Nick Coghlan
hashcollision wrote: > Currently, > True or False > works as expected, but > True xor False > is invalid. I don't see a reason why and, or, not are valid python > keywords but xor is not. Can this be added in python 3.0 for completeness? XOR can't be shortcircuited, so it doesn't gain from having

Re: [Python-3000] XOR and NOT operator syntax

2007-12-22 Thread Oleg Broytmann
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 03:15:43PM -0500, hashcollision wrote: > Currently, > True or False > works as expected, but > True xor False > is invalid. I don't see a reason why and, or, not are valid python keywords > but xor is not. Can this be added in python 3.0 for completeness? > > Also, > True &

[Python-3000] XOR and NOT operator syntax

2007-12-22 Thread hashcollision
Currently, True or False works as expected, but True xor False is invalid. I don't see a reason why and, or, not are valid python keywords but xor is not. Can this be added in python 3.0 for completeness? Also, True & False, True | False, True ^ Fals, True != False works but !True, !False dosn't.