> Unlike some languages, which choose confusing and arbitrary sets of > values that count as truthy or falsey, Python encourages a simple > distinction, something versus nothing. Values which represent some kind > of "nothing" are falsey:
Hi Steven, Sure. I'm not arguing that Python's choices of what's truthy or falsey isn't consistent or hard to remember. What I'm saying is that I personally have to deal with multiple languages at once these days. (JavaScript is the big one.) I find one of the points where things seem needlessly divergent is truthiness. Given that, I personally subset the language so that I don't have to spend brainpower on this issue. As a confession: I have run and introduced bugs where the root cause was one language's truthiness table diverging from another. Given that I recognise that I make this particular class of mistake a bit more frequently than I'd like, I try to account for this personal weakness and engineer for it. I am not clever. >> To quote: "Let your statement be: 'Yes, yes', or "no, no': anything beyond >> these is of evil." > > "Have you stopped abusing small children yet?" :( I don't understand what your response here means. My intent in quoting Matthew 5:37 was purely as a joke, precisely because the quote is so ridiculously out of context and definitely not intended to apply to the boolean context of programming languages. My apologies if you didn't like that. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
