Am 08.07.2014 05:47, schrieb Ethan Furman:
On 07/07/2014 08:34 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Ethan Furman writes:
And what would be this 'sensible definition' [of value equality]?
I think that's the wrong question. I suppose Andreas's point is that
when the programmer doesn't provide a definition, there is no such
thing as a "sensible definition" to default to. I disagree, but given
that as the point of discussion, asking what the definition is, is moot.
He eventually made that point, but until he did I thought he meant that
there was such a sensible default definition, he just wasn't sharing
what he thought it might be with us.
My main point is that a sensible definition is up to the class designer,
so (all freedom at hand) would prefer an exception as default. But that
cannot be changed at this point, and maybe never will. And I don't
intend to stir up that discussion again.
I dropped my other point about a better default comparison (i.e. one
with a result, not an exceptioN). It is not easy to define one unless
one comes to types such as sequences or integral types, and they in fact
have defined their own customizations for comparison.
Bottom line: I'm fine with just a doc patch, and a testcase improvement :-)
Andy
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
