On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 11:54:09AM +0200, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > I'm sure we are already breaking that specification all over the place when > coercion is involved.
Indeed. And I get bitten by it every now and then. > So I see Python's specification as a guideline and something nice to > have, but I wouldn't refuse a coercion just because of it. I indeed would not refuse a specific coercion just for this. But in the long run I believe we should try to keep the reliance on "equality up to coercion" to a minimum. I.e. ideally not depend on this feature in the Sage library itself. Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. ThiƩry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net> http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.