Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Daniel Stutzbach
<dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
I should note that I've softened my position slightly from what I posted
yesterday. I could live with the following compromise:
>>> x = IPv4Network('192.168.1.1/24')
>>> y = IPv4Network('192.168.1.0/24')
>>> x == y # Equality is the part I really want to see changed
True
>>> x.ip
IPv4Address('192.168.1.1')
>>> y.ip
IPv4Address('192.168.1.0')
With those semantics, IPv4Network objects with distinct IP addresses (but
the same network) could no longer be stored in a dictionary or set. IMO, it
is a little counter-intuitive for objects to compare equal yet have
different properties. I don't think this is a good compromise.
This worries me too. It seems like a potentially dangerous half-measure.
I agree. I think keeping the concepts distinct and adding 2 new classes
is a better solution.
Eric.
_______________________________________________
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
