"Guido van Rossum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | But can this work? It might end up calling cmp() on two incomparable | objects. For __lt__ etc. that might be the right answer, but for | __eq__ it is *not* -- the default __eq__ and __ne__ *must* compare | object identity.
Sorry, leave them out then unless using a mixin. I was responding to Colin's wish that people be able to write one __cmp__ method instead of six and thinking about something like what Steven uses but based on __cmp__ instead of__key__. I am not thinking of any use cases at the moment could imagine this instead being a cookbook recipe. Or something to consider if there is substantantial objection to the demise of cmp as a alternative to keeping it. But maybe there will not be. | (What is this __cmp you refer to? A typo for __cmp__ or for cmp?) A substitute private name for __cmp__ if the latter is to be deprecated (and warned about). Terry Jan Reedy _______________________________________________ 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
