> The idea of judging an empty collection as having all items being any value is flawed, since there are no items to measure. It is on par with 1 / 0. Not real

> The idea of judging an empty collection as having all items being any value is flawed, since there are no items to measure. It is on par with 1 / 0. Not really. Those Python functions follow definitions from set theory and predicate logic, and in predicate logic e.g. "for all x, P(x)" is defined as being true if there are no x. The reason for it being defined that way in mathematics is that it actually leads to consistent rules and definitions without the need to define lots of special cases, even if some of those definitions aren't how most people would use some of the same words in everyday language. Similarly, the reason division by zero is considered undefined instead of e.g. equaling infinity is that if it were not considering undefined, that would lead to inconsistency. If we had 1 / 0 = a, with any valid result a, that would mean a * 0 would need to equal 1. Programming languages could of course define their APIs to follow some other (hopefully internally consistent) logic, and I guess you could consider mathematical definitions based on predicate logic or set theory as being a somewhat arbitrary choice. But I disagree that the definition used in Python is on par with division by zero.