Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The 'not not S' is just a conversion to bool. Is the following less > contorted to you? > > >>> bool([]) > False
Oh ok. Yes, bool(S) is much less contorted than "not not S". > 'Is all True' isn't the same as 'Has all True'. As I said, I'm not > questioning the mathematical meaning of the set relation 'is all > True', but wondering weather or not an alternate relation 'has all > True' would be better for use as a flow control test. > > Do you have some examples uses since it's obvious to you? # go out drinking when I'm finished with today's work if all (task.done() for task in self.things_to_do_today()): self.go_out_drinking() If I didn't have anything to do today, that should result in going out drinking immediately. > I just have a feeling we will see a lot of "S and all(S)" expressions > being used. Maybe that's not so bad, but I would prefer to not have > to do that if it turns out to the standard idiom for all testing > within a loop. I think "S and all(S)" is the right way to express that, if that's what's intended. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list