[Steven D'Aprano]
> I'd just like to point out that
> given the existence of float NANs, there's a case to be made for having
> separate <> and != operators with != keeping the "not equal" meaning and
> the <> operator meaning literally "less than, or greater than".
>
> py> NAN != 23
> True
On Sat, Jul 07, 2018 at 01:03:06PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
> >(while "<>" reads "less or greater" which is mathematically not
> >equivalent to that: not everything has a defined ordering relation.
>
> I think this is a silly argument against "<>".
While I
Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
(while "<>" reads "less or greater" which is mathematically not
equivalent to that: not everything has a defined ordering relation.
I think this is a silly argument against "<>". If we're going to try
to assign meaning to individual characters in an operator,
On 06.07.2018 7:02, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Alexander Belopolsky
wrote:
Python really has a strong C legacy and this is the area where I agree that
C designers made a mistake by picking a symmetric symbol (=) for an
asymmetric operation. On top of that, they
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 12:48 PM, Alexander Belopolsky
wrote:
>
> Python really has a strong C legacy and this is the area where I agree that
> C designers made a mistake by picking a symmetric symbol (=) for an
> asymmetric operation. On top of that, they picked an asymmetric digraph (!=)
> for a
