On Jul 15, 11:20 pm, Steven D'Aprano <steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> (It's not like explicit and implicit are distinct -- everything depends > on something implicit, if only the meaning of the words you use to > describe it.) > > It certainly doesn't mean that the semantics of Python the language must > be written out explicitly every time you use each feature. Of course not. Don't be ridiculous. > for x in sequence: [...] This syntax is explicit *enough*. We don't need to be any more explicit. But if you are going to argue that "if obj" is *explicit enough*, then apply your argument consistently to "String"+1.75 also. Why must we be explicit about string conversion BUT not boolean conversion? Can you reduce this to the absurd? Or will you just choose to ignore this valid point? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
