Prompted by the discussion here
The docs suggest some equivalent code for the behaviour of all and any
Should the behaviour of the equivalent code be considered part of the definition, or can an implementation implement them in a non-shortcircuit manner?
Here is the relevant excerpt from cpython/Lib/test/test_builtin.py
def test_all(self):
self.assertEqual(all([2, 4, 6]), True)
self.assertEqual(all([2, None, 6]), False)
self.assertRaises(RuntimeError, all, [2, TestFailingBool(), 6])
self.assertRaises(RuntimeError, all, TestFailingIter())
self.assertRaises(TypeError, all, 10) # Non-iterable
self.assertRaises(TypeError, all) # No args
self.assertRaises(TypeError, all, [2, 4, 6], []) # Too many args
self.assertEqual(all([]), True) # Empty iterator
S = [50, 60]
self.assertEqual(all(x > 42 for x in S), True)
S = [50, 40, 60]
self.assertEqual(all(x > 42 for x in S), False)
def test_any(self):
self.assertEqual(any([None, None, None]), False)
self.assertEqual(any([None, 4, None]), True)
self.assertRaises(RuntimeError, any, [None, TestFailingBool(), 6])
self.assertRaises(RuntimeError, all, TestFailingIter())
self.assertRaises(TypeError, any, 10) # Non-iterable
self.assertRaises(TypeError, any) # No args
self.assertRaises(TypeError, any, [2, 4, 6], []) # Too many args
self.assertEqual(any([]), False) # Empty iterator
S = [40, 60, 30]
self.assertEqual(any(x > 42 for x in S), True)
S = [10, 20, 30]
self.assertEqual(any(x > 42 for x in S), False)
It doesn't do anything to enforce the shortcircuit behaviour
The behaviour is guaranteed. I've contributed a patch, which was accepted and merged recently, so if you grab the latest sources you will see that the short-circuiting behaviour is now explicitly enforced.
git clone https://github.com/python/cpython.git
grep Short-circuit cpython/Lib/test/test_builtin.py