> Because it's not the default, it will be documented as being an > advanced use case, and it's useful in rare instances. > > And as I've said a number of times, both here and in other > discussions, I'm not arguing strenuously for this. I just think that, > given that it's not the default and it's not recommended and is > useful in advanced cases, I would prefer to leave it in. I understand > that you disagree with me.
Is there a real world example of such an "advanced case"? Eric, have you read https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/136 ? Specifically this comment from Hynek : "I never really thought about it, but yeah mutable objects shouldn’t have a __hash__ at all." It is clear from that thread that "hash=True" was an early design mistake, which was left in for compatibility reasons. Why are we copying bad design to the standard library? Elvis  https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/ 136#issuecomment-277425421 _______________________________________________ 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