Home Original page

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