Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-March/013884.html below:

[Python-Dev] (Don't Read If You're Busy With 2.1b2) "Rich" Comparisons?

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] (Don't Read If You're Busy With 2.1b2) "Rich" Comparisons?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] (Don't Read If You're Busy With 2.1b2) "Rich" Comparisons?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> Now that we have rich comparisons, I've suddenly realized they are
> not rich enough. Consider a set type.
> 
> >>> a = set([1,2])
> >>> b = set([1,3])
> >>> a>b
> 0
> >>> a<b
> 0

I'd expect both of these to raise an exception.

> >>> max(a,b) == a
> 1
> 
> While I'd like
> 
> >>> max(a,b) == set([1,2,3])
> >>> min(a,b) == set([1])

You shouldn't call that max() or min().  These functions are supposed
to return one of their arguments (or an item from their argument
collection), not a composite.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] (Don't Read If You're Busy With 2.1b2) "Rich" Comparisons?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] (Don't Read If You're Busy With 2.1b2) "Rich" Comparisons?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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