Reason why there is no "is Empty" in Python
<p><a href="http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/" rel="nofollow">The Zen of Python</a> says "Explicit is better than implicit."</p>

<p>I find that an <code>is Empty</code> to check whether some sequence is empty is so much more explicit than implicit booleanness.</p>

<pre><code>if some_sequence is Empty:
  some_sequence.fill_sequence()
</code></pre>

<p>Compare with</p>

<pre><code>if not some_sequence:
  some_sequence.fill_sequence()
</code></pre>

<p>This gets even more confusing with some unfavorably choosen variable names.</p>

<pre><code>if saved:
  mess_up()
</code></pre>

<p>Compare with</p>

<pre><code>if saved is not Empty:
  mess_up()
</code></pre>

<p>See also: "<a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/53513/python-what-is-the-best-way-to-check-if-a-list-is-empty">Python: What is the best way to check if a list is empty?</a>". I find it ironic that the most voted answer claims that implicit is pythonic.</p>

<p>So is there a higher reason why there is no <code>is Empty</code> in Python?</p>
