Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #51943

Re: Bug? ( () == [] ) != ( ().__eq__([]) )

Path csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.022
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.96; '*S*': 0.00; 'default.': 0.09; 'false,': 0.09; 'implements': 0.09; 'operand': 0.09; 'things,': 0.09; 'defer': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'it;': 0.16; 'unequal,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'obviously': 0.18; 'normally': 0.19; 'result.': 0.19; 'not,': 0.20; 'seems': 0.21; 'aug': 0.22; 'integer': 0.24; "shouldn't": 0.24; 'second': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; '3.2': 0.31; '>>>>': 0.31; "we're": 0.32; "can't": 0.35; 'knows': 0.35; 'equal': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'false': 0.36; 'object,': 0.36; 'returning': 0.36; 'done': 0.36; 'behind': 0.37; 'handle': 0.38; 'skip:[ 10': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'back': 0.62; 'skip:n 10': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'side': 0.67; 'determine': 0.67; 'reasoning': 0.91; 'directly.': 0.95; '2013': 0.98
DKIM-Signature v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=cO/WUprT6ycsPVQTalizC7GtsCvQwuS3gb+vPXixE9M=; b=jHrhrD21jVPaYPvyPbJkVEUa+LUh3am13LbF/DMqheWR3B91ugi4HfFuW+aF3nfH9H URIJSRHKrB/v234oT91D07gHop4GgwhKZUg03rNTExBn9lo3FZUVw4shoNQ4pVJWsA8T L1iEro4nZA+VDqS50NdAm7Y5ySTTv2aM9hQXozn/mpYcmf1A7yRk1wbOHygtSgKAO7/R tqelVa2fRj5I+cYSKw1p66kU3HRiLDG2EWwdI+0W9bOf3NXP3e76uAXxh2CkNt4nVDHd egwT8Eop7jwOhM0qumWrBthbxdVEdSeRbRZAB33iD82OL7v2icfx+iewARLAUcTtIH1U QaQA==
MIME-Version 1.0
X-Received by 10.52.89.170 with SMTP id bp10mr4226722vdb.104.1375657576290; Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To <51FED74E.6080003@markusrother.de>
References <51FED74E.6080003@markusrother.de>
Date Mon, 5 Aug 2013 00:06:16 +0100
Subject Re: Bug? ( () == [] ) != ( ().__eq__([]) )
From Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To python-list@python.org
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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.195.1375658082.1251.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 28
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1375658082 news.xs4all.nl 15963 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:53447
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.python:51943

Show key headers only | View raw


On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Markus Rother <python@markusrother.de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The following behaviour seen in 3.2 seems very strange to me:
>
> As expected:
>>>> () == []
> False
>
> However:
>>>> ().__eq__([])
> NotImplemented
>>>> [].__eq__(())
> NotImplemented

You don't normally want to be calling dunder methods directly. The
reasoning behind this behaviour goes back to a few things, including a
way to handle "1 == Foo()" where Foo is a custom type that implements
__eq__; obviously the integer 1 won't know whether it's equal to a Foo
instance or not, so it has to defer to the second operand to get a
result. This deferral is done by returning NotImplemented, which is an
object, and so is true by default. I don't see any particular reason
for it to be false, as you shouldn't normally be using it; it's more
like a "null" state, it means "I don't know if we're equal or not". If
neither side knows whether they're equal, then they're presumed to be
unequal, but you can't determine that from a single call to __eq__.

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Bug? ( () == [] ) != ( ().__eq__([]) ) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-08-05 00:06 +0100

csiph-web