On Wed, Sep 16, 2015, at 13:33, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 01:40 am, Random832 wrote: > > > "in" suggests a relationship between objects of different types (X and > > "something that can contain X") - all the other comparison operators are > > meant to work on objects of the same or similar types. > > `is` and the equality operators are intended to work on arbitrary > objects, > as are their inverses `is not` and inequality.
But they won't return *true* unless they're the same or similar types. > And with operator overloading, < <= > and => could have any meaning you > like: > > graph = a => b => c <= d <= e Are you suggesting that all objects concerned are a magical "graph node object", the <= and [sic] => operators of which return "edge objects", the and operator of which constructs a graph object containing all such edges? That's *horrifying*. And won't actually work. We haven't actually got an => operator, thankfully, and you can't overload 'and'. I bet you could do it in C++ though. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
