Nothing else is on the table. Seriously. Stop hijacking the thread.

--Guido (mobile)

On Apr 7, 2016 10:18 AM, "Ethan Furman" <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
On 04/07/2016 09:38 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:

Honestly I think that the OP has a point, and I don't think we have to
bend over backwards to preserve int compatibility. After all str(True)
!= str(1), and surely there are other examples.

I think the str() of a value, while possibly being the most interesting piece of information (IntEnum, anyone?), is hardly the most intrinsic.

If we do make this change, besides needing a couple major versions to make it happen, will anything else be different?

- no longer subclass int?
- add an "unknown" value?
  - how will indexing work?
  - or any of the other operations?
- don't bother with any of the other mathematical operations?
  - counting True's is not the same as adding True's

I'm not firmly opposed, I just don't see a major issue here -- I've needed an Unknown value for more often that I've needed ~True to be False.

--
~Ethan~
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/