IIRC I’ve had pip fail like that too. Unable to build a lib it included.

One of the principles of the Pythonic style is: simple is better than complex.

But is it when you consider ambiguity and expressiveness too?

len(mylist) tells me it’s definitely a list and not null or whatever. It also tells me the intent of whoever writes the code was checking length.

If it requires a long article to explain, I’d certainly be hesitant to use and prefer. The question is, is it surprising or intuitive that the truthy becomes a length check. What do you want to express with your code. And who will read it, and what expectations and requirements do you want to require of them.

For sequence type objects, such as lists, their truth value is False if they are empty.

While the 2nd approach is not wrong, the first method is considered more Pythonic. Many people don’t agree, but I’ve already put forward my points in a previous article on that debate.

Does Pythonic mean best practice in the python community or “good python”?

If “many people don’t agree”, how can they claim it to be “pythonic”? Isn’t that contradictory?

Huh, it suggests using bun - now I don’t even know what it is anymore. Nothing on the websites really told me. I guess I’ll have to create a project and look at the code to understand what it is and does?

frontend database 🤔