Hi Steven.
Thanks for the clarifications. I've pushed a complete working patch (with
tests) to GitHub. It's linked to the bpo issue.
Branch: https://github.com/brandtbucher/cpython/tree/addiction
PR: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/12088
Right now, it's pretty much a straight
On 2019-03-02 22:02, francismb wrote:
On 2/27/19 7:14 PM, MRAB wrote:
Are there any advantages of using '+' over '|'?
or for e.g. '<=' (d1 <= d2) over '+' (d1 + d2)
'<=' is for comparison, less-than-or-equal (in the case of sets, subset,
which is sort of the same kind of thing). Using it
On 2/27/19 7:14 PM, MRAB wrote:
> Are there any advantages of using '+' over '|'?
or for e.g. '<=' (d1 <= d2) over '+' (d1 + d2)
___
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of
On 3/2/19 8:14 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Lastly, I'm still bugged by use of the + operator for replace-logic instead
> of additive-logic. With numbers and lists and Counters, the plus operator
> creates a new object where all the contents of each operand contribute to the
> result.
> On Mar 1, 2019, at 11:31 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> There's a compromise solution for this possible. We already do this for
> Sequence and MutableSequence: Sequence does *not* define __add__, but
> MutableSequence *does* define __iadd__, and the default implementation just
> calls
