Names changed to protect the guilty

[Hendrik van Rooyen]

"Steven D'Aprano" <steve at REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> wrote:

> On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:29:34 -0700, John Machin wrote:
> > MonkeeSage wrote:
> >> On Oct 6, 8:02 pm, "MonkeeSage" <MonkeeS... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > it is clearer to you to make the condition explicit ("blah not False"),
> >>
> >> "blah not False" -> "blah is False"
> >
> > Whichever way your team wants to interpret it, d00d.
> >
> > Please consider whether you should be writing "(blah is False) is
> > True", that would be more explicit.
>
> Puh-lease! Get it right!
>
> It should be "((blah is False) is True) is True".

I once saw a baking powder tin with a picture of a baking powder tin with a
picture of a baking powder tin...

- Hendrik