On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 02:40:04PM +0200, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 14.12.19 12:45, Steven D'Aprano пише: > >The list.sort method is documented to only use less than: > > > >https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#list.sort > > > >but I don't think that is correct, it seems to use greater than if it > >exists and less than doesn't. My understanding is that items need to > >define one of l.t. or g.t. to make it sortable, not the full complement > >of six rich comparison methods. > > What evidence do you have that it is not correct?
I might be misinterpreting the evidence, but sorting works on objects that define `__gt__` without `__lt__`. py> class A: ... def __init__(self, x): self.x = x ... def __gt__(self, other): return self.x > other.x ... py> L = [A(9), A(1), A(8)] py> L.sort() py> [obj.x for obj in L] [1, 8, 9] But the main part of my question is whether we should make the same guarantee for sorted, min and max as we already make for list.sort. -- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/K7BSMHSC5SWDS3222SI3M4UJ4FHCQRFX/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
