I haven't taken any action, and it looks like __cmp__ isn't being called. I'd rather not add it back; if you want it back, could you at least write up a brief PEP? A patch would also help; I recall that it was quite a relief being able to cut it out, so I expect that patching it back in would be quite cumbersome.
--Guido On 3/20/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting from the commit message for r51533, which removed the default > ordering: > > """ > A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is > the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, > implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing > __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing > __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other > way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? > Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() > method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off... > """ > > What's the status on this? FWIW, I would like to see __cmp__ stay as a > fallback measure if __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, etc aren't defined for > total ordering purposes. I've run across this while trying to get the > docs toolchain working, and I was initially shocked that __cmp__ was > no longer called. > > Collin Winter > _______________________________________________ > 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/guido%40python.org > -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
