Operator Precedence/Boolean Logic

[Chris Angelico]

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody at gmail.com> wrote:
> Heh! A flurry of opinions!
> No time right now… other than to say thank you (MRAB) for this little gem:
>
> On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 10:29:02 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
>> On 2016-07-16 17:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 10:33 pm, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> > And yes, Rustom, I'm very familiar with the philosophical objections to the
>> > something/nothing distinction. "Is zero truly nothing, or is it some thing
>> > distinct from the absence of any number?" I'm not interested in that
>> > argument. Let the philosophers count angels, but as far as Python code
>> > goes, I'm an intuitionist: if I have zero sheep, that's the same as not
>> > having any sheep, or having no sheep.
>> >
>> [snip]
>>
>> And if you're going to argue that zero is something, then you could also
>> argue that false is something...
>
> Likewise Chris’ example of the comparison of Pike and Python alternative
> semantics

So if you accept that there are different semantics that all have
validity, can you also accept that Python's model is not "bizarre"?

ChrisA