Python `if x is not None` or `if not x is None`? [closed]
Solution 1:
There's no performance difference, as they compile to the same bytecode:
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis("not x is None")
1 0 LOAD_NAME 0 (x)
2 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
4 COMPARE_OP 9 (is not)
6 RETURN_VALUE
>>> dis.dis("x is not None")
1 0 LOAD_NAME 0 (x)
2 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
4 COMPARE_OP 9 (is not)
6 RETURN_VALUE
Stylistically, I try to avoid not x is y
, a human reader might misunderstand it as (not x) is y
. If I write x is not y
then there is no ambiguity.
Solution 2:
Both Google and Python's style guide is the best practice:
if x is not None:
# Do something about x
Using not x
can cause unwanted results.
See below:
>>> x = 1
>>> not x
False
>>> x = [1]
>>> not x
False
>>> x = 0
>>> not x
True
>>> x = [0] # You don't want to fall in this one.
>>> not x
False
You may be interested to see what literals are evaluated to True
or False
in Python:
- Truth Value Testing
Edit for comment below:
I just did some more testing. not x is None
doesn't negate x
first and then compared to None
. In fact, it seems the is
operator has a higher precedence when used that way:
>>> x
[0]
>>> not x is None
True
>>> not (x is None)
True
>>> (not x) is None
False
Therefore, not x is None
is just, in my honest opinion, best avoided.
More edit:
I just did more testing and can confirm that bukzor's comment is correct. (At least, I wasn't able to prove it otherwise.)
This means if x is not None
has the exact result as if not x is None
. I stand corrected. Thanks bukzor.
However, my answer still stands: Use the conventional if x is not None
. :]
Solution 3:
Code should be written to be understandable to the programmer first, and the compiler or interpreter second. The "is not" construct resembles English more closely than "not is".