Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder5.news.weretis.net!feeder.news-service.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=rebertia.com; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=YQRTj99myzwhgwtw0rQCJizb0aAJ9edWsQm7GGSiq/Ffmn+8YZNvaNaTefOmLtQmek G1K5vwQX4G2exqFTpL0ZOu0KcA7YnYxdEAfbtmrhfqx1hfHx06HLhb2y6hRxYOVzDJuu Ba3jhl7LAJxwUi2QMK98a9D+vF3mR40+aUux8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: chris@rebertia.com
In-Reply-To: <4da9fb0b$0$13696$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
References: <4da9fb0b$0$13696$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:58:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Equivalent code to the bool() built-in function
From: Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com>
Cc: python-list@python.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.442.1302987518.9059.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 38
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3347

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 1:24 PM, candide <candide@free.invalid> wrote:
> Consider the following code :
>
> # --------------------------------------
> def bool_equivalent(x):
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0return True if x else False
>
>
> # testing ...
>
> def foo(x):
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0return 10*x
>
> class C:
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0pass
>
> for x in [42, ("my","baby"), "baobab", max, foo, C] + [None, 0, "", [],
> {},()]:
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0print bool(x)=3D=3Dbool_equivalent(x)
> # --------------------------------------
>
>
> Is the bool_equivalent() function really equivalent to the bool() built-i=
n
> function ?

The ternary operator, if-statement, and `while` all do the equivalent
of an implicit bool() on their condition, so bool_equivalent() will
always give the same result as bool() because it's indeed using the
moral equivalent of bool() behind the scenes.
That is, `True if x else False` conceptually gets compiled down to
`True if bool(x) =3D=3D 1 else False` (but without doing a run-time lookup
of "bool").

Cheers,
Chris
--
http://blog.rebertia.com