At 12:26 PM 3/10/2008 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: >Hi Phillip, > >On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 07:05:12PM -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > > I did not, however, need the equality of bound methods to be based on > > object value equality, just value identity. > > > > ...at least until recently, anyway. I do have one library that wants > > to have equality-based comparison of im_self. What I ended up doing > > is writing code that tests what the current Python interpreter is > > doing, and if necessary implements a special method type, just for > > purposes of working around the absence of im_self equality > > testing. However, it's a pretty specialized case (...) > >I found myself in exactly the same case: a pretty specialized example >where I wanted bound methods to use im_self equality rather than >identity, solved by writing my own bound-method-like object. But that's >not really hard to do, and the general tendency (which matches my own >opinion too) seems to be that using im_self identity is less surprizing. > >In general, "x.append" is interchangeable with "x.append" even if >"x.append is not x.append", so let's go for the least surprizing >behavior: "m1.im_self is m2.im_self and m1.im_func==m2.im_func". >Objection?
Nope; that's exactly what I proposed at the end of the email quoted above. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
