[Greg Ewing] > We certainly don't need '&&' and '||' -- we already have them, > they're called 'and' and 'or'. They're not the same to David: C && and || return 0 or 1, not sometimes their LHS or RHS argument. > But if booleans are to become a separate type eventually, > I think that '&' and '|' should perform the standard > (non-shortcircuiting) boolean algebra operations on them. > > In fact, that could be added now to the reference > implementation in the PEP -- I don't think it would > introduce any extra breakage. That's already in the reference implementation, along with xor too.
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