On Jul 1, 8:23 am, Steven D'Aprano <steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 10:37:05 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> > > wrote: > >> Thomas Jollans <t...@jollybox.de> writes: > > >>> My sole point, really, is that "normally", one would expect these two > >>> expressions to be equivalent: > > >>> a < b < c > >>> (a < b) < c > > >> What norm gives you that expectation? That's not how those operators > >> work in mathematical notation. I know of no programming language that > >> would give a newcomer to Python that expectation. So where is the norm > >> you're referring to? > > > C, SQL, REXX, and many other languages. > > All the worse for those languages, since they violate the semantics of > mathematical notation. > > The more I learn about C, the less I want to know about C. What sort of > crazy language designer thought that having > > 2 == 2 == 2 > > return 0 (false) was a good idea?
Kernighan and Ritchie admit they made a design mistake with their operator precedences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_%28programming_language%29#Criticism That those mistakes are repeated and replicated is more unfortunate. The second bullet above to be read along with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assignment_%28computer_science%29#Assignment_versus_equality -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
