Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au>
> wrote:
> > Thomas Jollans <t...@jollybox.de> writes:
> >
> >> My sole point, really, is that "normally", one would expect these two
> >> expressions to be equivalent:
> >>
> >> a < b < c
> >> (a < b) < c
> >
> > What norm gives you that expectation? That's not how those operators
> > work in mathematical notation. I know of no programming language
> > that would give a newcomer to Python that expectation. So where is
> > the norm you're referring to?
>
> C, SQL, REXX, and many other languages.
So, languages without strong typing then. In that case, I revise my
statement: I know of no programming language with strong typing that
would give a newcomer to Python the above expectation.
Since Python does have strong typing, norms about operations from
weakly-typed languages should not be expected to apply.
(Incidentally, PostgreSQL was the SQL implementation I went to, and::
postgres=# SELECT (1 < 2) < 3;
ERROR: operator does not exist: boolean < integer
LINE 1: SELECT (1 < 2) < 3;
^
HINT: No operator matches the given name and argument type(s). You might
need to add explicit type casts.
So not all SQL implementations make the mistake of weak typing.)
--
\ “Try adding “as long as you don't breach the terms of service – |
`\ according to our sole judgement” to the end of any cloud |
_o__) computing pitch.” —Simon Phipps, 2010-12-11 |
Ben Finney
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
