On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:11:14PM -0300, Soni L. wrote: > Currently ~False is -1 and ~True is -2. Would be nicer if ~bool was the > same as not bool.
That's your opinion. I disagree. Bitwise-not is not the same thing as boolean-not, and they should not be spelled the same, especially not when that would break the invariant that if `a == b` then `~a == ~b`. >>> 0 == False True >>> ~0 == ~False True If you want boolean-not, then use the boolean-not operator `not`. > In particular, this is nice for xnor operator: a ^~ b. This currently > works on ints, but not on bools If it works on ints, of course it works on bools, because bools are ints. You get identical results whether you use int (0, 1) or bools (False, True) in every combination: >>> def xnor(a, b): ... return a ^ ~b ... >>> [xnor(a, b) for a in (0, 1) for b in (0, 1)] [-1, -2, -2, -1] >>> [xnor(a, b) for a in (0, 1) for b in (False, True)] [-1, -2, -2, -1] >>> [xnor(a, b) for a in (False, True) for b in (0, 1)] [-1, -2, -2, -1] >>> [xnor(a, b) for a in (False, True) for b in (False, True)] [-1, -2, -2, -1] -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/66NH5YKXRIWQWWKOZ6UHW37U55TS2F3Z/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
