integer >= 1 == True and integer.0 == False is bad, bad, bad!!!

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:35:18 -0700, rantingrick wrote:

> On Jul 11, 7:02 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-
> cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> Come back when you have profiled your code and can prove that the cost
>> of building empty tuples is an actual bottleneck.
> 
> Did you even read this thread, i mean from head to tail.

Yes I did.

> I NEVER said
> building EMPTY tuples was the cause of my rant.

The cause of your rant appears to be that you have nothing better to do 
with your time. But the *excuse* for your rant was that you had to 
replace:

    choiceIdx1 = None

with:

    choiceIdx1 = ()

and followed with:

    Seems kinda dumb to build a tuple just so a conditional 
    wont blow chunks!

and

    My bin packer could potentially compute millions of parts. 
    I do not want to waste valuable processor cycles building 
    numerous TUPLES just for the sake of a conditional 
    "condition"!

[emphasis added]


> My complaint (an oddly
> enough the title of this thread!) concerns the fact that Python treats 0
> as False and every integer above and below 0 as True. Which is another
> example of how *some* aspects of Python support bad coding styles.

Yes, Python does support bad coding styles. The treatment of 0 as a false 
value is not one of them though.



-- 
Steven