John Roth wrote: > The not operator and the bool() builtin produce > boolean results. Since bool is a subclass of int, > all the integer operations will remain integer > operations. This was done for backwards > compatability, and is unlikely to change in the 2.x > series.
Ok, shame on me, I completely overlooked "not" and it surprises myself because it's not like I haven't used it, I just didn't see "not" as an operator, maybe because i can't find a __not__ method in bool class. (Is it hidden somewhere or is computed in some other way?) (However (not x) whould be as annoying as 1-x even if a little more readable (if you consider lispish parentheses readable): Input expression: (not (not x)&(not y)!(not (z|v))) Maybe direct eval is just the wrong way of doing this, I should look for or make muParser bindings for Python instead..) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
