On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Heh! A flurry of opinions! > No time right now… other than to say thank you (MRAB) for this little gem: > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 10:29:02 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote: >> On 2016-07-16 17:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> > On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 10:33 pm, Rustom Mody wrote: >> [snip] >> >> > And yes, Rustom, I'm very familiar with the philosophical objections to the >> > something/nothing distinction. "Is zero truly nothing, or is it some thing >> > distinct from the absence of any number?" I'm not interested in that >> > argument. Let the philosophers count angels, but as far as Python code >> > goes, I'm an intuitionist: if I have zero sheep, that's the same as not >> > having any sheep, or having no sheep. >> > >> [snip] >> >> And if you're going to argue that zero is something, then you could also >> argue that false is something... > > Likewise Chris’ example of the comparison of Pike and Python alternative > semantics
So if you accept that there are different semantics that all have validity, can you also accept that Python's model is not "bizarre"? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
