On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:41:58 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote: > Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Pretending that False and True are just "magic names" for 0 and 1 might >> be "easier" than real boolean algebra, but that puts the cart before >> the horse. Functionality comes first: Python has lists and dicts and >> sets despite them not being ints, and somehow newcomers cope. I'm sure >> they will cope with False and True not being integers either. > > Are they are aren't they?
I'm sorry, I can't parse that sentence. > print 1 in [True] > print 1 == True > print len(set(map(type, [1, 1]))) > print len(set(map(type, [1, True]))) But I guess that you are probably trying to make the point that True and False are instances of a _subtype_ of int rather than ints, under the mistaken idea that this pedantry would matter. (If this is not the case, then I apologize for casting aspersions.) However, you may notice that I said _integers_, which is not the same thing as ints: the Python types int and bool are both implementations of the mathematical "integer" or "whole number". -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
