Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> my original motivating case was objects that are hashable but not weakly
> referenceable.
It is probably not good design to extend discard() to handle types that aren't
handled by the other methods. To me, it isn't at all surprising that the
business of a WeakSet is to handle objects that are both hashable and weak
referenceable. Muddying those waters may do more harm than good. My
recommendation is to decline the feature request.
One other thought. As the Python world starts to encourage type annotations
and static type checking, one benefit we would hope for is code with cleaner
matches between the caller and callee signatures. Accordingly, we shouldn't
encourage people to write code with odd signatures:
x : thing_that_cant_possibly_be_in_the_weakset
some_weakset.discard(x) # Someday, we might hope this would be flagged
----------
status: pending -> open
type: -> enhancement
versions: +Python 3.8
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue30100>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
