[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Xtrem532]

Change by Xtrem532 :


--
nosy: +Xtrem532

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[miss-islington]

miss-islington  added the comment:


New changeset 8a2c2d4e1b6b46a9a982e5c064ca4399ec28d55d by Miss Islington (bot) 
in branch '3.6':
bpo-34365: Update date object documentation (GH-8814)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/8a2c2d4e1b6b46a9a982e5c064ca4399ec28d55d


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[miss-islington]

miss-islington  added the comment:


New changeset e2b40f4ce954ea3d35a73541029b2253abd9d245 by Miss Islington (bot) 
in branch '3.7':
bpo-34365: Update date object documentation (GH-8814)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/e2b40f4ce954ea3d35a73541029b2253abd9d245


--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Mariatta Wijaya]

Mariatta Wijaya  added the comment:

Thanks!

--
nosy: +Mariatta
resolution:  -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[miss-islington]

Change by miss-islington :


--
pull_requests: +8620

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[miss-islington]

Change by miss-islington :


--
pull_requests: +8619

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[miss-islington]

miss-islington  added the comment:


New changeset 9c223794c754408644c16349b85dd27fdba8a926 by Miss Islington (bot) 
(Danish Prakash) in branch 'master':
bpo-34365: Update date object documentation (GH-8814)
https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/9c223794c754408644c16349b85dd27fdba8a926


--
nosy: +miss-islington

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Paul Ganssle]

Change by Paul Ganssle :


--
nosy: +p-ganssle

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Danish Prakash]

Change by Danish Prakash :


--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +8292
stage:  -> patch review

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Kevin Norris]

Kevin Norris  added the comment:

There is none.  It raises a TypeError.  See 
https://docs.python.org/3/reference/expressions.html#value-comparisons

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Danish Prakash]

Danish Prakash  added the comment:

> But in 3.x, comparison no longer falls back to comparing object addresses.

What is the default fallback in 3.x?

--
nosy: +prakashdanish

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Steve Dower]

Change by Steve Dower :


--
keywords: +easy
versions:  -Python 3.4, Python 3.5

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"

[Kevin Norris]

New submission from Kevin Norris :

The 3.x datetime documentation contains the following footnote:

> In other words, date1 < date2 if and only if date1.toordinal() < 
> date2.toordinal(). In order to stop comparison from falling back to the 
> default scheme of comparing object addresses, date comparison normally raises 
> TypeError if the other comparand isn’t also a date object. However, 
> NotImplemented is returned instead if the other comparand has a timetuple() 
> attribute. This hook gives other kinds of date objects a chance at 
> implementing mixed-type comparison. If not, when a date object is compared to 
> an object of a different type, TypeError is raised unless the comparison is 
> == or !=. The latter cases return False or True, respectively.

But in 3.x, comparison no longer falls back to comparing object addresses.  
Also, some of the comments on issue 8005 seem to suggest that this footnote is 
not actually true in 3.x (aside from the first sentence, of course).  But 
regardless, the footnote should not refer to a long dead interpreter behavior 
as if it were still around.

--
assignee: docs@python
components: Documentation
messages: 323314
nosy: Kevin.Norris, docs@python
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the 
default scheme of comparing object addresses"
versions: Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com