> > Tim, should we start to be worried about the problems you have to get > > those things right or are you just in very-low-concetration mode? > > I'm in no-concentration mode, and, yes, you should pray for me before going > to sleep, upon waking, before meals, and once for each tooth that gets > brushed. I'll let you know whether it helps! Thanks in advance. > You're welcome. I'll do each time I pray for me (seems a more reasonable approach <wink>). I know you can care for yourself. Anyway it was not meant in such a personal sense, it was more about how much bot-friendly (and user-friendly in general) reasoning on the consequences of the change is <wink>. >[Tim] >> I don't see anything about changing operator.truth() in Guido's PEP, and >> would be surprised if I did: it's been the documented purpose of that >> function to return 0 or 1 since 1996, and there's no apparent reason to >> change it. If you want a similar function to return True or False >> instead, well, that's what the new bool() would do, and TOOWTDI. > >Although I see Guido's patch *does* change operator.truth in this way. I >don't think it should. Two people, different expectations. Probably Guido should reason explicitly about this and document the outcome in the PEP. regards.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4