On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 13:37 -0700, zdmytriv wrote: > 2 Malcolm: > > > It makes a lot of sense when you think about what they can apply to. > > Equality is a natural operation for all sorts of object types. The > "less > > than" comparison only applies to things that have a natural > ordering. > > The first set is much larger than the second. > > A normal use for "ifequal" is testing string values for equality. > not so > > much for doing mathematical comparisons.
[...] > You still can compare them and python is not going to complain and > more you can compare even objectA < 1... I used the word "natural" in my original post for a reason. You can certainly compare these objects, but it's not particularly sensible. We already have enough problems with people comparing visually similar, but actually unlike, objects and having equality fail. Introducing ordering operations would lead to further confusion. > I still can't get why not to implement ifless. It's like 3 min of > coding. That's one good reason why it's not needed in core. If you need it and you understand the trade-offs and consequences, you can implement it immediately with no break in the flow. Django's supported third-party template tags since day 1 (and even earlier). :-) Anyway, it's all a moot point. Feature freeze is in place. Let's move onwards to 1.0. Regards, Malcolm --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
