> Guido writes: >> the conventional way of treating __add__ >> etc. has a different need for resolving conflicts than Phillip Eby's >> idea of requiring strict dominance of the selected solution over all >> other candidates. So now that you mention it I wonder if the whole >> strict dominance requirement isn't a red herring? And perhaps we >> should in general use "returns NotImplemented" as a signal to try the >> next best candidate, strict dominance be damned...
Michael Chermside wrote: > my_x = my_mpz + my_array > > THIS then raises an exception because there is no one dominant > definition. Or, to make a long story short: there might not be a single next best candidate, but multiple, which are mutually equally-good: both mpz+object and object+array would match, and neither is better than the other. This is because they only form a partial order. Of course, it might be possible to impose a total order on top of it (e.g. giving the left-more operands higher precedence, or considering the order of registration). This all sound arbitrary, though. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
