On 11/5/05, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/4/05, Eyal Lotem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a few claims, some unrelated, and some built on top of each
other. I would like to hear your responses as to which are
convincing, which arne't, and why. I think that if these claims
[Guido van Rossum]
I've made a final pass over PEP 352, mostly fixing the __str__,
__unicode__ and __repr__ methods to behave more reasonably. I'm all
for accepting it now. Does anybody see any last-minute show-stopping
problems with it?
[François]
I did not follow the thread, so maybe
On 11/3/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Right, but lists (dicts, tuples, etc.) are defined as containers, and
their comparison operation is defined on their contents. Objects are
not defined as containers in the general case, so defining comparisons
based on their contents
Noam Raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/3/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To summarize, I think that value-based equality testing would usually
be what you want, and currently implementing it is a bit of a pain.
Actually, implementing value-based equality testing, when
Noam Raphael wrote:
Is there a reason why the default __hash__ method returns the id of the
objects?
You are asking why question of the kind which are best answered as
why not.
IOW, you are saying that the current behaviour is bad, but you are not
proposing any alternative behaviour. There
On 11/5/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
1. It doesn't add complexity, or a new builtin.
It changes default behavior (which I specified as a portion of my
statement, which you quote.
And you are wrong, it adds complexity to the implementation of both
class instantiation and
Noam Raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/5/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
1. It doesn't add complexity, or a new builtin.
It changes default behavior (which I specified as a portion of my
statement, which you quote.
And you are wrong, it adds complexity to the
On 11/6/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Sorry, I meant complexity to the Python user - it won't require him to
learn more in order to write programs in Python.
Ahh, but it does add complexity. Along with knowing __doc__, __slots__,
__metaclass__, __init__, __new__,
Noam Raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/5/05, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More generally, I claim that the current behaviour is better than
*any* alternative. To refute this claim, you would have to come
up with an alternative first.
The alternative is to drop the
Noam Raphael wrote:
On 11/5/05, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More generally, I claim that the current behaviour is better than
*any* alternative. To refute this claim, you would have to come
up with an alternative first.
The alternative is to drop the __hash__ method of
Noam Raphael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/6/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Sorry, I meant complexity to the Python user - it won't require him to
learn more in order to write programs in Python.
You are right. But that's Python - I think that nobody knows all the
11 matches
Mail list logo
