If we do it that way, we have worse problems.
if "False":
# What do you expect? True or False?
print("True")
else:
print("False")
if bool("False"):
print("True")
else:
print("False") # This would be different if we landed here.
Honestly it's not that hard to write something that looks like this:
def str_to_bool(val: str) -> bool:
return val.lower() in ["yes", "true", "1"]bool() is not a function named after a fundamental type. bool is a type. As with any type, you can call bool(...) to construct a new object of that type.
https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#bool
A good tutorial will reflect this fact and use appropriate language.
Both the idea that you can "cast", and the idea that bool is a function, are misunderstandings rooted in the idea that Python should be like C in all ways.
If you search "type casting in Python" you will find lots of articles explaining how to use int(), str(), etc. to cast. This is a common and well-documented concept, even if it's different under the hood from e.g. C.
The idea that you'd name a function bool() and have it act differently is a deeply confusing design decision that it's understandable people would get misled by and frustrated with. This is a function named after a fundamental type. It's not a random user-defined constructor.