Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> writes: > 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."
I'd put it under the general rubric of "explicit is better than implicit". The language shouldn't do silly automatic typecasts all over the place. Yes, it saves a few keystrokes to say "if x:" instead of "if len(x)==0:" or even "if bool(x):", but if I program in a style where I like to think I know the type of something when I use it, I'd like the interpreter to let me know when I'm wrong instead of proceeding silently. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
