On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Andrew Robinson <andr...@r3dsolutions.com> wrote: > Why this is so important to Guido, I don't know ... but it's making it VERY > difficult to add named aliases of False which will still be detected as > False and type-checkable as a bool. If my objects don't type check right -- > they will likely break some people's legacy code... and I really don't even > care to create a new instance of the bool object in memory which is what > Guido seems worried about, rather I'm really only after the ability to > detect the subclass wrapper name as distinct from bool False or bool True > with the 'is' operator. If there were a way to get the typecheck to match, > I wouldn't mind making a totally separate class which returned the False > instance; eg: something like an example I modified from searching on the > web:
Okay, so why not just go with your own class, and deal with the question of the type check? Simple solution: Instead of fiddling with __gt__/__lt__, create your own method, and use your own comparison function to sort these things. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
