On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:20:21 -0700, Rick Johnson wrote: > Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Rick Johnson wrote: >> >> >> > But just because we have been trained that the implicit `if x:` is >> > shorthand for the reasonable `if bool(x) == True:` >> >> That's not reasonable. bool(x) already returns a True or False flag, >> comparing it to True is superfluous. > > So what? That's a simple matter of translating source code to byte code
Who cares about the byte code? We don't read or write byte code. The *source code* you wrote is dumb. It displays an appalling lack of understanding of Python's semantics, and poor reasoning about even the simplest logical tests. Here's another person's comments: "When I see someBool == true, I can't help but feel like the programmer hasn't internalized the idea of evaluation, which is a pretty fundamental deficiency." https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/posts/12828/revisions You might as well write: if (x is True) and (True is True): # just in case True is False In plain English terms, you are doing the equivalent of saying: "Is (is that true?) true?" Who talks like that? Why should we write code like that? -- Steven D'Aprano “You are deluded if you think software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can write virtualization layers without security holes.” —Theo de Raadt -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
