Ron Adam wrote:
Ok, so what if... instead of bool being a type, it be a keyword that is just a nicer way to spell 'not not'?
The main benefit of having a bool type is so that its values display as "True" and "False" rather than whatever surrogate values you happen to have used to represent true and false. The fact that bool() can be used canonicalise a truth value is secondary -- the same thing could just as well be achieved by a plain function (as it was before bool became a type). It's an extremely rare thing to need to do in any case. If any change is to be made to bool in 3.0, my preference would be to keep it but make it a separate type.
Are 'and' and 'or' going to be changed in 3.0 to return bool types too?
I very much hope not! Their current behaviour is very useful, and I would hate to lose it. -- Greg