PEP 285: Adding a bool type

[Fredrik Lundh]

Paul Rubin wrote:
>
> It's a cost/benefit thing.  Type/class unification may have cost more
> in complexity than bools cost, but it has high benefits.  The bool
> thing would a complicated change with limited benefit, so it's provoked
> some sharp reactions.

well, if you study the PEP carefully, it isn't a complicated
change.  had GvR just checked it in, most people wouldn't
have noticed.

but the cost is still > 0, and the benefit is close to 0.  it's
hard to be enthusiastic; the time spent on this could have
been spent on more useful stuff...

> It's usually easier to justify ADDING stuff than CHANGING stuff.

I assume you mean adding stuff to the library, not adding stuff
to the language.

</F>