Mike Meyer wrote: > Personally, I think we'd be better off to come up with a term for this > property that doesn't have a commonly understood meaning that has such > broad areas of disagreement with the property. I've been using > "hashable", which I would currently define as "has a __hash__ method > with the properties described in the __hash__ documentation, or does > not have either a __cmp__ or a __eq__ method."
I would like to use "hashable" as a term as well, but it appears that many people would understand that to mean "has a __hash__ implementation" (i.e. hash(x) returns a value, instead of raising an exception). Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
