On 3/2/07, Ron Adam firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Josiah Carlson wrote:
Ron Adam email@example.com wrote:
The "small" inconsistency (if any) here is the 'not' keyword vs the 'bool()' constructor. They pretty much do the same thing yet work in modestly different ways.
Maybe I'm missing something, but is there a place where the following is true?
(not not x) != bool(x)
I can't think of any that I've ever come across.
I don't think you are missing anything. I did say it was a *small* inconsistency in how they are used in relation to 'and', 'or' and 'not'. ie.. a constructor vs a keyword in a similar situation.
'and', 'or' and 'not' are operators (and hence keywords) because making them functions is incredibly ugly: and(or(a, b), not(c)).
Changing "bool(x)" to "bool x" introduces a much larger inconsistency between bool and the other built-in types.
And I also pointed out it doesn't change what they do, it has more to do with how they work underneath and that there may be some benefits in changing this.
So the main reason is for optimization? Are you really calling bool() frequently in inner-loop code? Is a profiler telling you that bool() is a bottleneck in your applications?