On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 3:07 AM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>
>> The difference is that None is a singleton, so the set of all
>> None type instances is {None}. You always have an intuitive total order
>> relation on one element sets: the identity relation.
>
> I don't see this having much practical consequence, though,
> since sorting members of a 1-element set isn't a very
> useful thing to do.This discussion smells like a re-hashing of the PEP 326 discussion. While I will (momentarily) lament None's passing as a (more or less) minimal object in Python, I believe that an explicit maximum and minimum value are much preferred over None. And as I stated previously, having a single implementation of the one true maximum or minimum value is much preferable to everyone writing their own (especially with respect to potential bugs). If a max/min value is desired (votes for None comparing smaller are a vote for a max/min value, just with a specific previously-established spelling), then a single implementation should exist. But then we get back into the same discussion that was had before: do we want them, and if so, what do we call them? - Josiah _______________________________________________ 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
