Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <davea@davea.name>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.003
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'operator': 0.03; 'subject:bug': 0.07; 'consistency': 0.09; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; '>that': 0.16; '__lt__': 0.16; 'call?': 0.16; 'insisted': 0.16; 'ought': 0.16; 'python3.': 0.16; 'silly': 0.16; 'simpson': 0.16; 'subject:python3': 0.16; 'types,': 0.16; 'unordered': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; "aren't": 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'least': 0.26; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'point': 0.28; "i'm": 0.30; 'types.': 0.31; 'sense': 0.34; 'but': 0.35; 'surely': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'aside': 0.39; 'either': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'dave': 0.60; 'received:74.208': 0.68; 'special': 0.74; 'received:74.208.4.194': 0.84; 'angel': 0.91
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 21:41:33 -0400
From: Dave Angel <davea@davea.name>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au>
Subject: Re: Differences of "!=" operator behavior in python3 and python2 [ bug? ]
References: <519175B0.90603@davea.name> <20130513233040.GA97066@cskk.homeip.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130513233040.GA97066@cskk.homeip.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:30/6WGueGgq2NnaSipNqKfsO6ENQ+pAhJj+Nkjw47Ix /eh8/HfvBJWzVHx2pU63FtZeR5ySOXfFcoCK8wwjDX0hb3A/gk ZiDMZiZ7g4xfQPScE3ZV+DMDfHxl/QGd65AnXWmP4x7aZYlzHz zth7QEiKW41SItph6dey3erY5JYjiomAePe3H7M9JXCN0jKsXg I4yhEH/pMknibvyV+uBRfDVYiN9Sdg8iY9kBynLNMC84wfE9qG dxaGLJ2P/rmq+ZZC7+kG827WTdP08m9IkejodT7sQrh4u8KZIx bRSS09WNElx+IjygA4r2hKDFYJKwNEsf9A09fdk+mOpln7FAA= =
Cc: python-list@python.org
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.1654.1368495711.3114.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 26
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1368495711 news.xs4all.nl 15958 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:44402
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:45276

On 05/13/2013 07:30 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 13May2013 19:22, Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> wrote:
> | On 05/13/2013 06:53 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> | >I much prefer the alternative <> for != but some silly people insisted
> | >that this be removed from Python3.  Just how stupid can you get?
> |
> | So which special methods should the <> operator call?  By rights it
> | ought to call both __gt__ and __lt__ and return True if either of
> | them is True.
>
> Surely it should require both of them to be true...

Then it would never be true.  At least not for numbers.

>
> Personally I'm for != given we have ==. Aside from notational
> consistency it makes conceptual sense for unordered types, which
> <> does not really.

That's the point of mentioning __gt__ and __lt__,  they aren't available 
on unordered types.



-- 
DaveA