"Andrew Koenig" <ark-mlist at att.net> wrote in message news:001f01c40dd9$92dabe90$6402a8c0 at arkdesktop... > > I would say that Python is served well by the two equality predicates > > it has, that it is impossible to please everyone, and that users > > should get used to writing the predicate they want if it is not one of > > the builtins. +1 > Without disagreeing with your statement, I can also say this: > > The fact that "is" is so easy to use encourages some programmers to use it > when they would be better off with a different predicate that is much less > readily available. If "is" represented this other predicate instead, most > programs that use it would be better off. Until someone writes, tests, and publishes an equiv function, and others verify its usefulness, that strikes me as a speculative hypothesis. Concrete code would also be clearer to me than the natural language definitions I have seen. Terry J. Reedy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4