[Python-Dev] Re: Empty keyword

[Sylvain Hellegouarch]

It still doesn't make sense to me as I don't see why the fact a list is 
empty means that it can be stated as false.

Intuitively it doesn't sound correct to me as there is no logical link 
between the truth of an object and the fact that it can be empty.

What I mean, is that usually I find Python to be really logical and 
clear, but there I think it is misleading.

You're gonna say "nah you're stupid, it is easy"... certainly when you 
are used to it, it sounds ok but it doesn't IMO.

Cheers :)
- Sylvain

Casey Duncan wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:32:18 +0100
> Sylvain Hellegouarch <sh at defuze.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>It miht sound stupid or useless, or maybe someone has already
>>mentioned it but sometimes I wish Python could provdie an "Empty"
>>keyword like The "None" one.
>>
>>It would be usefull to validdate the emptyness of any scalar or
>>sequence in an uniform way instead of using things such as :
>>
>>if len(mylist) == 0:
> 
> 
> You would not write it this way anyhow. In Python you can test a
> sequence directly as in:
> 
> if mylist:
> 
> or
> 
> if not mylist:
> 
> Empty sequences (and mappings) are false and non-empty sequences are
> true.
> 
> See also: http://docs.python.org/ref/Booleans.html#Booleans
> 
> -Casey
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org
>