[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com added the comment: The patch was pretty good. Committed it in r82899 and r82900. Thanks Eli for the patch Terry for the review. -- nosy: +orsenthil resolution: - fixed stage: commit review - committed/rejected status: open - closed

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com added the comment: I agree with Terry's proposal. Here's a patch file for Doc/reference/expressions.rst that implements the change. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file17967/issue9132.2.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: Looks good to me. Thanks Eli. -- stage: needs patch - commit review ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue9132 ___

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Changes by Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +eli.bendersky ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue9132 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: On the 'patch' keyword: I thought the same as you (only for diff) until yesterday morning when Brett Cannon specifically told me that I should also set it for in-message text patches. This was in the context of him having not noticed for

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment: Thanks for the explanation of the patch keyword. Its description (click on “Keywords”) is indeed generic (“contains patch”), http://www.python.org/dev/patches/ should probably say it too. I don’t have enough knowledge to make a useful comment

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: I intentionally began my first post with The RefMan section is 5.9. Comparisons. Look there, particularly the definition of comp_operator. In this context, I think 'order comparison' is pretty clearly a comparison with an order operator, ''

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: The RefMan section is 5.9. Comparisons. The 3.x docs are by design pretty much free of 2.x references. Which is to say, they are a fresh start with 3.0 as the base. So I would also remove footnote 5. Footnote 4 is currently needed because the

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment: Thanks for tackling this Terry. Did you include a patch, i.e. a diff file? If not, the “patch” keyword does not apply, IIUC. Plain English suggestions are helpful but they’re reviewed in a different way than a diff. “The 3.x docs are by design

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

New submission from Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com: reference/expressions.html#notin reads: Mappings (dictionaries) compare equal if and only if their sorted (key, value) lists compare equal. [4] Outcomes other than equality are resolved consistently, but are not otherwise

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Changes by Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com: -- keywords: +easy ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue9132 ___ ___

[issue9132] Documentation for comparing dictionaries is out of date

Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment: Reference to sorted (key, value) lists is a bit misleading as well. Dicts' equality is defined even if key or values are not orderable. -- nosy: +belopolsky ___ Python tracker