On 2010-03-05 14:58 PM, Jack Diederich wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:01:23 -0400, Rolando Espinoza La Fuente wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:32 PM, mk<mrk...@gmail.com> wrote:
Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
1 == True
True
0 == False
True
So what's your question?
Well nothing I'm just kind of bewildered: I'd expect smth like that in
Perl, but not in Python.. Although I can understand the rationale after
skimming PEP 285, I still don't like it very much.
So, the pythonic way to check for True/False should be:
1 is True
False
Why do you need to check for True/False?
You should never check for "is" False/True but always check for
equality. The reason is that many types support the equality (__eq__)
and boolen (__bool__ in 3x) protocols. If you check equality these
will be invoked, if you check identity ("is") they won't.
It depends on what you're doing. mk seems to want to distinguish booleans from
other objects from some reason.
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
