Message234605
| Author | martin.panter |
|---|---|
| Recipients | antocuni, berker.peksag, chris.jerdonek, cvrebert, docs@python, eric.araujo, franck, mark.dickinson, martin.panter, medwards, ncoghlan, rhettinger, terry.reedy |
| Date | 2015-01-24.12:40:45 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1422103246.05.0.874048467624.issue4395@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
The reference to @functools.total_ordering was actually already there; I just moved it into the paragraph about relationships between the operators. I should also point out that my description of the default __ne__() assumes that Issue 21408 is resolved; the current behaviour is slightly different. If you think something else could be added to the patch, I’m happy to try and add it. Perhaps the default object.__eq__() behaviour? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-01-24 12:40:46 | martin.panter | set | recipients: + martin.panter, rhettinger, terry.reedy, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, eric.araujo, medwards, cvrebert, chris.jerdonek, docs@python, berker.peksag, franck, antocuni |
| 2015-01-24 12:40:46 | martin.panter | set | messageid: <1422103246.05.0.874048467624.issue4395@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-01-24 12:40:46 | martin.panter | link | issue4395 messages |
| 2015-01-24 12:40:45 | martin.panter | create | |