Op 2005-10-24, Steve Holden schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Antoon Pardon wrote: >> >>>>>set([1]) <= set([2]) >> >> False >> >>>>>set([2]) <= set([1]) >> >> False >> > Set orderingd are explicitly documented as being based on proper > subsetting. This is an abuse of the operators to make subset tests more > convenient rather than a definition of an ordering.
It *is* a definition of an ordering. For something to be an ordering it has to be anti symmetric and transitive. The subset relationships on sets conform to these conditions so it is a (partial) ordering. Check your mathematic books, Why you would think this is abuse is beyond me. -- Antoon Pardon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
