On 27 February 2013 01:50, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote: > On 2/25/2013 12:35 PM, Ethan Furman wrote: > > But this I don't, and in both mine, Ted's, and Alex's versions enums >> from different groups do not compare equal, regardless of the underlying >> value. Of course, this does have the potential problem of `green == 1 >> == bee` but not `green == bee` which would be a problem with set and >> dicts -- but I'm the only one who has brought up that issue. >> > > I have not been following the discussion in detail so I missed that > before. Breaking transitivity of equality a no-no. It is basic to thought > and logic. > > decimal(0) == 0 == 0.0 != decimal(0) > was a problem we finally fixed by removing the inequality above. > http://bugs.python.org/**issue4087 <http://bugs.python.org/issue4087> > http://bugs.python.org/**issue4090 <http://bugs.python.org/issue4090> > > We should NOT knowingly re-introduce the same problem again! If color and > animal are isolated from each other, they should each be isolated from > everything, including int. FWIW the only reason I made my enums int-based (and comparable with ints) was because I read somewhere that Guido had said that any stdlib enum would have to be an int subclass. I have no problems with having int-like enums that: 1. Are not int subclasses; 2. Do not compare equal with ints unless explicitly converted. I do think an int-like enum should implement both __int__ and __index__. Tim Delaney -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130227/73824e02/attachment.html>
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