On Mar 9, 10:42 am, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> On Mar 9, 3:22 pm, Aaron Brady wrote:
>
> > My complaint was that the docs for the function, as well as its name,
> > are misleading. RichCompareBool should not take the short cut, and "x
> > in [x]" should call something else that does. (I am not arg
On Mar 9, 3:22 pm, Aaron Brady wrote:
> My complaint was that the docs for the function, as well as its name,
> are misleading. RichCompareBool should not take the short cut, and "x
> in [x]" should call something else that does. (I am not arguing
> against the decided behavior of "x in [x]", bt
On Mar 9, 10:11 am, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> On Mar 2, 10:33 am, Aaron Brady wrote:
>
> > The code for PyObject_RichCompare does not contain this, it doesn't
> > seem. Is it a bug?
>
> It's not a bug. See revision 67204:
>
> http://svn.python.org/view?view=rev&revision=67204
>
> Mark
My complai
On Mar 2, 10:33 am, Aaron Brady wrote:
> The code for PyObject_RichCompare does not contain this, it doesn't
> seem. Is it a bug?
It's not a bug. See revision 67204:
http://svn.python.org/view?view=rev&revision=67204
Mark
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mar 7, 11:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Aaron Brady wrote:
> > Hi. Just bringing it up again. I feel the docs should mention it at
> > least, and there should possibly be a separate function.
>
> Post a bug report or feature request on the tracker, or nothing will happen.
>
> If you include
On Mar 7, 10:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Aaron Brady wrote:
> > Hi. Just bringing it up again. I feel the docs should mention it at
> > least, and there should possibly be a separate function.
>
> Post a bug report or feature request on the tracker, or nothing will happen.
>
> If you include
Aaron Brady wrote:
> Hi. Just bringing it up again. I feel the docs should mention it at
> least, and there should possibly be a separate function.
Post a bug report or feature request on the tracker, or nothing will happen.
If you include a patch, odds of it being approved are greatly increas
On Mar 3, 12:42 am, Aaron Brady wrote:
> On Mar 2, 9:24 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
>
>
> > Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> > > En Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:54:09 -0200, Terry Reedy
> > > escribió:
>
> > >> Aaron Brady wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>> In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perf
On Mar 3, 6:01 am, "Gabriel Genellina" wrote:
> En Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:42:02 -0200, Aaron Brady
> escribió:
>
> > Also, did not receive Gabriel's post.
>
> That's because I replied a month ago - and probably you had no idea what I
> was talking about by that time.
>
> (Sorry, I inadvertedly s
En Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:42:02 -0200, Aaron Brady
escribió:
Also, did not receive Gabriel's post.
That's because I replied a month ago - and probably you had no idea what I
was talking about by that time.
(Sorry, I inadvertedly set the clock one month back. You didn't miss
anything)
-
On Mar 2, 9:24 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> > En Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:54:09 -0200, Terry Reedy
> > escribió:
>
> >> Aaron Brady wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
> >>> extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichComp
Gabriel Genellina wrote:
En Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:54:09 -0200, Terry Reedy
escribió:
Aaron Brady wrote:
Hi,
In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
To me, the existence of two functions sugges
En Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:54:09 -0200, Terry Reedy
escribió:
Aaron Brady wrote:
Hi,
In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
To me, the existence of two functions suggests that they are *intende
Aaron Brady wrote:
Hi,
In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
To me, the existence of two functions suggests that they are *intended*
to act differently.
Here's the excerpt from RichCompareBo
On Mar 2, 5:00 am, Duncan Booth wrote:
> Aaron Brady wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
> > extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
snip
> > The code for PyObject_RichCompare does not contain this, it doesn't
> >
Aaron Brady wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
> extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
>
> Here's the excerpt from RichCompareBool (line 612):
>
> /* Quick result when objects are the same.
> Guaran
Hi,
In the source for 3.0.1, PyObject_RichCompareBool seems to perform an
extra check on identity that PyObjecct_RichCompare does not perform.
Here's the excerpt from RichCompareBool (line 612):
/* Quick result when objects are the same.
Guarantees that identity implies equali
17 matches
Mail list logo
