Newcomer struggling with tutorial
CPK Smithies
cpks at NOspam.btopenwhirled.com
Sun Oct 5 11:58:12 EDT 2003
"Tim Peters" <tim.one at comcast.net> wrote in
news:mailman.1065325869.29360.python-list at python.org:
> Perhaps that's confusing you.).
Yes. I screwed up with my example and I'm sorry to waste people's time. I
was getting confused.
What I found so disturbing is that
a < b == c
is not equivalent either to
(a < b) == c
nor to
a < (b == c)
since (given that for example (a, b, c) == (-1, 77, 1)) the first is false
while the latter are both true.
Perhaps some people enjoy mastering quirks like these. I just see it as a
source of confusion and errors. What's so terrible about having to type "(a
< b) && (b == c)" if that's what is intended? Is it really worth
sacrificing a logical grammar for the sake of a few keystrokes? So it's not
a bug in implementation that I'm talking about. It's a bug in the design.
More information about the Python-list
mailing list