All the discussion following Steven's hypothetical .EQ. operator (yes, not a possible spelling) just seems to drive home to me that what everyone wants is simply a function.
Many different notions of "equivalence for a particular purpose" have been mentioned. We're not going to get a dozen different equality operators (even Lisp or Javascript don't go that far). But function names are plentiful. So just write your own: has_same_elements(a, b) case_insensitive_eq(a, b) same_json_representation(a, b) allclose(a, b) # A version of this is in NumPy recursively_equivalent(a, b) nan_ignoring_equality(a, b) And whatever others you like. All of these seem straightforwardly relevant to their particular use case (as do many others not listed). But none of them have a special enough status to co-opt the '==' operator or deserve their own special operator. -- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions.
_______________________________________________ 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/FIRBDVEQ4N6NVNQNJJ2L63AHQJPWIRV4/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
