Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=l9yLdTErxYM1uw50BPg/BeuYnTL6l8+bX9vZaF4x24mhSIiAGnempmECjW6xFka29h R5UYuKIWYhzq87X9fWq3JgAo7J9COYcD/wA1ceolBhoKsgGu3L+H11NZ+9rN/W2jbSd3 rjumJl7TCos2YlpCafX2bgMw2VVyMngPkkLp8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4dab845d$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
References: <4da9fb0b$0$13696$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <mailman.442.1302987518.9059.python-list@python.org> <87k4etho6e.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <4daa2b72$0$32037$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <87d3klha85.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <4daaa6f6$0$20187$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <878vv9gqhq.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <4dab7654$0$7290$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <4dab845d$0$29986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 10:52:31 +1000
Subject: Re: Equivalent code to the bool() built-in function
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To: python-list@python.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.489.1303087959.9059.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 51
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3445

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>>>> types =3D [str, complex, float, bool]
>>>> [f(x) for f, x in zip(types, (1, 2, 3, 4))]
> ['1', (2+0j), 3.0, True]

I believe this one would work fine with a function defined as per OP -
zip takes callables, which could be types or functions.

> * if flags are written 0 and 1, that frequently fools people into
> =A0thinking they are meant to be understood as *integer* values rather
> =A0than boolean values, and they will do arithmetic on those flags;

Depending on what you mean by arithmetic, that can be a good thing.
I've frequently, in various languages, used booleans as though they
were integers - for instance, indexing a list with an integer plus a
condition. Contrived example:

mode =3D 2
...
print ("default", "default-root",
    "modeA","modeA-root",
    "modeB","modeB-root",
) [mode+mode+(uid=3D=3D0)]

For debugging output, where I want to keep it as self-contained as
possible, constructs like these are very handy - especially as they
can be embedded inside other expressions.

Every language I've used except BASIC has used True =3D=3D 1, False =3D=3D =
0,
but I'm sure there are some which use other values. If True =3D=3D -1,
then you simply subtract the bool from the int instead of adding them.
If it's something else, you arrange the array accordingly.

> * there was never any consistency, people would write any of:
>
> =A0true =3D 1; false =3D 0
> =A0FALSE =3D 0; TRUE =3D not FALSE
> =A0True =3D -1; False =3D not True

Just as long as someone doesn't use:
  true =3D 1; false =3D -1
which results in the annoying situation that:
  if x =3D=3D false:
is different from:
  if x:
But on the plus side, TheDailyWTF.com is never short of publishable materia=
l...

Chris Angelico