Bar Harel wrote:
> Hey Steve,
> How about set.symmetric_difference()?
> Does it not do what you want?
> Best regards,
> Bar Harel
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2020, 10:03 PM Steve Jorgensen [email protected] wrote:
> > Currently, the issubset and
> > issuperset methods of set objects accept
> > arbitrary iterables as arguments. An iterable that is both a subset and
> > superset is, in a sense, "equal" to the set. It would be inappropriate for
> > == to return True for such a comparison, however, since that
> > would
> > break the Hashable contract.
> > Should sets have an additional method, something like like(other),
> > issimilar(other), or isequivalent(other), that returns
> > True for any
> > iterable that contains the all of the items in the set and no items that
> > are not in the set? It would therefore be true in the same cases where
> > <set> = set(other) or <set>.issubset(other) and
> > <set>.issuperset(other)
> > is true.
> >
> > Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> > Message archived at
> > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ULQQ7T...
> > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
> >
Indirectly, it does, but that returns a set, not a `bool`. It would also,
therefore, do more work than necessary to determine the result in many cases.
A python implementation for what I'm talking about would be something like the
following.
```
def like(self, other):
found = set()
for item in other:
if item not in self:
return False
found.add(item)
return len(found) == len(self)
```
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/XURB3B3RVM23ECR7BZZFFW7ISLLR63NQ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
