memes

14893 readers

4242 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civil

No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politics

This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent reposts

Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No bots

No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads

No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

[email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
[email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
[email protected] : Linux themed memes
[email protected] : for those who love comic stories.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

177

Don't do it (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I understand that, it makes sense. But why does it not throw an error? The parameter is missing after all.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Actually the explanation is wrong.

not()

is actually

not ()

not is a keyword not a function.

Boolean of empty tuple is False and then not negates it.

I explained it better here:

https://lemm.ee/post/61594443/19783421

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

That makes a lot more sense, thanks I did see in the syntax highlighting that it was a keyword but forgot that none of them took parameters.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

No it's not, "" (a null/empty string) is the parameter. Not every function needs a parameter to be valid, and negation is one of them. Negating nothing is something, so "not()" = "not(null)" = "not(false)" = "true"