Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements

Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Date	2013-02-07 22:22 -0800
References	(8 earlier) <5004ec84$0$11116$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.2201.1342502395.4697.python-list@python.org> <50050f70$0$30002$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.2203.1342513414.4697.python-list@python.org> <21fcdb92-20e3-428b-b06b-057065a4ab25@oo8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID	<70f6350c-556a-4329-a2aa-a568e91756da@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements
From	Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 8:35:09 PM UTC-5, alex23 wrote:
> On Jul 17, 6:23 pm, Andrew Berg <bahamutzero8...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 7/17/2012 2:08 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> 
> > > The default behaviour is that every object is something, hence true-like,
> 
> > > unless explicitly coded to be treated as false-like. Since both loggers
> 
> > > and functions are objects, they are true-like unless the default is
> 
> > > overridden.
> 
> >
> 
> > I am aware of the default behavior, but the reason for it still eludes me.
> 
> 
> 
> Because it makes it simple to distinguish between having an object and
> 
> not having one without having to explicitly test for it each time.
> 
> 
> 
>     db = connect("my:db") # or None if the connection failed
> 
>     if db:
> 
>         <do something>
> 
> 
> 
> I find that usage to be incredibly intuitive.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Implicit conversion to boolean in if and while statements Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-07 22:22 -0800

csiph-web