On the eve of posting this to c.l.py, add a response to a common but

nonsensical suggestion (that x == True should hold for all true x).

pep-0285.txt

@@ -203,6 +203,19 @@ Issues
     for functions and types only.  But I'm willing to consider the
     lowercase alternatives if enough people think it looks better.
 
+    It has been suggested that, in order to satisfy user expectations,
+    for every x that is considered true in a Boolean context, the
+    expression x == True should be true, and likewise if x is
+    considered false, x == False should be true.  This is of course
+    impossible; it would mean that e.g. 6 == True and 7 == True, from
+    which one could infer 6 == 7.  Similarly, [] == False == None
+    would be true, and one could infer [] == None, which is not the
+    case.  I'm not sure where this suggestion came from; it was made
+    several times during the first review period.  For truth testing
+    of a value, one should use "if", e.g. "if x: print 'Yes'", not
+    comparison to a truth value; "if x == True: print 'Yes'" is not
+    only wrong, it is also strangely redundant.
+
 
 Implementation