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
