Mark Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > Taking it out probably had something to do with NaNs, but this > discussion needs to avoid getting lost in NaN paradoxes and instead > focus on a notion of membership that is ALWAYS true given object > identity. This is an essential pragmatism necessary for reasoning about > programs.
I agree wholeheartedly. NaN comparison weirdness isn't anywhere near important enough to justify breaking these invariants. Though I imagine that if 'x == x' started returning True for NaNs there might be some complaints. > P.S. Mark, those Py2.6 invariants are not still true in Py3.0: You're right, of course. _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue4296> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
