> Would it be simpler to institute a special rule that True = 1 is silently > ignored, but True = anything else generates an error message? Or am I > overlooking something important? Some people prefer True = (1 > 0) because this accesses the special integer (with value 1) that is used by the interpreter for the outcome of boolean results . > If you want to handle assigning to True an expression whose value is > known only at run time, translate it into > > if expression != 1 : > raise Exception, "Attempt to assign invalid value to True" > > which would give a run-time error without costing cycles anywhere else. I suggest you try coming up with a patch for that to see how much work it is. I expect it to be tough. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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