3 ms·

Thanks! Good point. However setting def __bool__(self): return self.nonEmpty would mess up certain methods e.g. .index for nested Arrays as __eq__ is compu

• pansa2 6y ago
  > bool(Array(False, False)) would evaluate to True Isn't that consistent with the built-in `list`, though, because `bool([False, False])` is True?
  • lauriat 6y ago
    My explanation was pretty poor, let me rephrase For example, when calling Array((x, y), (z, w)).index((z, w)) the following piece of code is executed bool(Array((x, y)).__eq__((z, w))) = bool(Array(False, False)) If __bool__ returned whether the Array is nonempty, bool(Array(False, False)) would evaluate to True and the method would wrongly return 0. You're right that it would be more clear if __bool__ would behave similarly, but since Array computes operations element-wise, it isn't possible.
    • wodenokoto 6y ago
      I think the complaint is that you are using `bool` as a `all()` call on your Arrays. If you used `all()` in your implementation instead, you could be compatible with the idiomatic use of `bool(my_list)` and the _very_ common `if my_list:` structure could be used with Arrays too (like most people probably would expect from a "better list type") Regardless, Pandas struggles with the same problem, so you are at least in good company :)