What values are considered false?

[Erik Max Francis]

Remco Gerlich wrote:

> No, he didn't. He thought the *function* should be false, not the
> function's
> result. An interesting idea, but possibly hard to implement (write
> code to
> decide if a function does nothing). Also, I haven't been able to come
> up
> with any situation where it would be useful yet :-)

It brings up the question of where you'd draw the line, as well.  Would
it just be functions whose body is a pass?  How about ones which just
explicitly return None (which have precisely the same effect when
called)?  What about those that do something local without side effect
and then return None or let control flow out?  Same thing again, but
you're starting to wander into unclear territory.

But, as you say, the biggest problem with the idea is its total lack of
utility :-).

-- 
 Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ Laws are silent in time of war.
\__/ Cicero
    Esperanto reference / http://www.alcyone.com/max/lang/esperanto/
 An Esperanto reference for English speakers.