On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 9:51 PM Serhiy Storchaka <storch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 02.05.20 21:34, Ahmed Amr пише:
> > I see there are ways to compare them item-wise, I'm suggesting to bake
> > that functionality inside the core implementation of such indexed
> > structures.
> > Also those solutions are direct with tuples and lists, but it wouldn't
> > be as direct with arrays-lists/tuples comparisons for example.
>
> If make `(1, 2, 3) == [1, 2, 3]` we would need to make `hash((1, 2, 3))
> == hash([1, 2, 3])`.
>
Would we? Is the contract `x == y => hash(x) == hash(y)` still required if
hash(y) is an error? What situation involving dicts could lead to a bug if
`(1, 2, 3) == [1, 2, 3]` but `hash((1, 2, 3))` is defined and `hash([1, 2,
3])` isn't?
The closest example I can think of is that you might think you can do `{(1,
2, 3): 4}[[1, 2, 3]]`, but once you get `TypeError: unhashable type:
'list'` it'd be easy to fix.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/BMSP5BQP2UURBKV5LPLQXO6PZDP5PQGX/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
