On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 11:10:48 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote: > Anyway, Python's overloading of bool(...) is yet another misfeature and > although it's convenient, the "explicit is better than implicit" > principle indicates to avoid that sort of trick.
"Overloading of bool()"? I don't understand what that means -- you mean you dislike the ability to overload __bool__ (__nonzero__ in older Pythons)? That seems strange. Python allows you to overload __int__ and __str__ and __float__, why is __bool__ a misfeature? If that's what you mean, then I'm perplexed. Or do you mean that all Python objects are interpretable in a truth context? If that's what you mean, then I'm not perplexed, I'm sure you're utterly wrong. Certain people -- a tiny minority -- keep trying to argue that the ability to say "if obj" for arbitrary objects is somehow a bad thing, and their arguments seem to always boil down to: "If you write code that assumes that only bools have a truth value, then surprising things will happen because all objects have a truth value." Well duh. If you think you have a better reason for calling the truth value of arbitrary objects a "misfeature", I'd like to hear it. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
