[issue22001] containers "same" does not always mean "__eq__".

Change by Raymond Hettinger : -- resolution: -> out of date stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Andy Maier added the comment: I reviewed the issues discussed here and believe that the patch for #Issue 12067 adresses all of them (and yes, it is large, unfortunately). It became large because I think that more needed to be fixed. May I suggest to review that patch. Andy -- nosy:

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Martin Panter added the comment: Issue 12067 has a large patch in progress that would conflict with the changes suggested here. However most of the concerns here may already be addressed there, if the patch ever goes ahead. -- nosy: +vadmium ___

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: Ah... be the same object or compare equal sounds much better. Yes, the plain language is clear and reads nicely. We can't say will normally, since we don't know about the infinite number of possible container types that people might create. The most

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +ezio.melotti ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22001 ___ ___

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

R. David Murray added the comment: must be identical sounds like identical twins. I think what you mean is must be references to the same object or to objects that compare equal. If you don't want to get into the concept of 'references' here, I suppose it could read must be the same object

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Jim Jewett added the comment: Ah... be the same object or compare equal sounds much better. I don't want same to sound like an informal wording for equal, because getting rid of the confusion over NaN and similar objects is the whole point of the revision. On the other hand, I don't want the

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Changes by Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com: -- assignee: docs@python - rhettinger nosy: +rhettinger ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue22001 ___

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

New submission from Jim Jewett: https://docs.python.org/3.5/reference/expressions.html#not-in Containers are permitted to (and generally do) read same as as is or __eq__), which can be confusing -- particularly in the section defining __eq__. Several suggested changes: The values

[issue22001] containers same does not always mean __eq__.

Steven D'Aprano added the comment: On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 07:39:21PM +, Jim Jewett wrote: Note, however, that containers will normally implement item equality as a is b or a==b We can't say will normally, since we don't know about the infinite number of possible container types that