[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as (original) (raw)
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 16:32:48 CET 2013
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
On 2/25/2013 2:48 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:34:35 -0800 Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote:
Antoine, question for you: Do you think enums from different groupings should compare equal? Equality should be mostly transitive so, yes, I think they should. Or if they do not, then they should neither compare equal to ints. One or the other, take your pick, or make both choices available.
I'm already working on too many different things to take a serious run at a labelled values proposal, but it is avoiding precisely this kind of problem that makes me favour a permissive solution that doesn't define any new behaviour for the instance, aside from changing the result of repr() and the contents of pickles. (You could potentially combine it with a "sensitive values" proposal that ensured repr() and other operations only displayed the label without showing the contents at all - this is also potentially useful for labelling large strings that may otherwise overwhelm debug output).
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Pre-alpha draft for PEP 435 (enum). The name is not important at the moment, as
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]