Meaning of None - was PEP 285: Adding a bool type

[Boris Borcic]

Colin J. Williams wrote:
> 
[...]
> > Note this would introduce three-valued logic into Python, which would be
> > helluva confusing to beginners, who tend to understand the law of the
> > excluded middle implicitly.
> 
> I wonder about the confusion.  It would perhaps add clarity to an aspect of
> Python.
> 
> Let's look at some examples:

[snip over the instance traces]

> Logical operations
> 0 or  None, 1 or  None: None 1
> 0 and None, 1 and None: 0 None
>               not None: 1
> 
> With a three value scheme, the results would
> be the same for the first two, whereas the
> result of `not None` would itself be None.
> 
> I would appreciate comments.

Beautiful, and so what ? :) And there's indeed my own
use of None over Laura.

I'd say indeed that we should value Laura's intervention
not exactly for what she appears to have meant to mean,
but as an true alarm bell... I mean that if I take to the
psychic gesture to believe her, to make it plausible I have to
evoke an older idea of mine.

Tadah, OIOM :

[b] Python is unlike [a] GatesDesigns(tm) because :

Grammar is valued like a hidden beauty,
holding promises of evolution, not yet
to be fathomed, and this in the service
(choice where they differ) [a] of growing
GatesDesign(tm)'s mass of consumership
[b] of not wasting grammar pockets-of-untapped
-dynamics to silly-purposes-according-to
-better-common-interest.

IOW GvR is serious where BG isn't and LW too clever.

OK, now my current theory of Laura is that she's there
like an Except: clause that fired over the thread of PEPS
because at PEP 285 exactly Sharon invaded Palestine while
"the border of the inner square" of "aesthetic manna" Laura
"was guarding" underwent a "boundaries violation" because of
"quasifascist boolean pseudowisdom taking over python family
jewels in eg falsety gathering."

Should Python grow restartable interrupts to fully
solve the case ?

Should PEPS become mythified ? This needs order. Someone
proposed "chinese torture", I prefer (while I did not look)
to positivise the work, saying "in the ideal" the PEP process
should look like "a linear run of mutually orthogonal bytecodes
of what we'd need to call a 'crazy diagonal VM'".

Sorry, I see I'll have to write a couple PEPS, with no chance
to be taken seriously at having them see pass.

Mmmhhh. This gives me an idea. If we could efficiently market
Python as "God's very own choice of programming language" to
credulous masses, then a market geometry for adaptation of
Python patterns, metapatterns and minipatterns would spring
to existence :)

And this in turn would make it become natural for Python
to grow to the niche of being the only programming language
endowed with a so-called "boolean style sheets" with 
standard styles of the distribution being Style152 or
Style22.285 or StyleCyclotomicF or StyleIconIdol or
StyleDonJim :)

"Boolean style sheets" can certainly be sold as "refactoring
from __future__ statements"

Maybe something as simple as

"from __future__ StyleDonJim import booleans"

Mmmhh. This seems to lead us to somewhere. Three digits releases
tend to be bugfix releases closing their generation. Naked code
runs on them with at least an implied

from __future__ Style3DVersion import defaults

Where 3DVersion stands for the 3 digits of the version :)

> 
> Colin W.
> 

Cheers, Boris "30215" B.
--
python >>> filter(lambda W : W not in "ILLITERATE","BULLSHIT")