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:
Are you sure?
I can’t test it now, but to me it looks like ()
is an empty tuple. Python behavior is that for logic operations empty set equals to false. Then we apply not
to get True
. Not having space between not
operator and parentheses makes it look like it is a function.
Python, but this is actually defined and documented behavior.
Edit: to illustrate what I mean:
not() # True
this actually is not ()
(the lack of space makes it look like a function), ()
is a tuple, in python an empty collection returns False
, this is to make checks simpler. You can type:
if my_list:
do something
instead of
if len(my_list) > 0:
do something
not
negates it so you get True
str(not()) # 'True'
converts resulting bool
type into a string representation
min(str(not())) # 'T'
This might feel odd, but that’s also documented. min()
not only allows to compare two numbers like it is in most languages, but you can also provide a sequence of values and it will return the smallest one.
String is a sequence of letters.
Letters are comparable according to ASCII (so you can do sorting). In ASCII table capital letters are first, so the ‘T’ is the smallest value.
ord(min(str(not()))) # 84
this just converts ‘T’ to Unicode value which is 84
range(ord(min(str(not())))) # range(0, 84)
This creates a sequence of numbers from 0 to 83
sum(range(ord(min(str(not()))))) # 3486
This works like min()
except adds up all the numbers in the sequence together, so in our case 0+1+2+3+…+83 = 3486
chr(sum(range(ord(min(str(not())))))) # 'ඞ'
reverse of ord()
, converts Unicode value to a character.
40 years as OP says ;) also you need to go to sleep at the same time
Did Zuck’s check not clear yet?
Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?
When I was working for an ad exchange, everyone had adblock installed in their browsers, I found that quite ironic.
This is why you always block ads and trackers. It never pays to worry about revenue of “poor sites”