[Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.
Terry Reedy
tjreedy at udel.edu
Wed Sep 30 18:38:44 CEST 2009
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Wed Sep 30 18:38:44 CEST 2009
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mark Dickinson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > Please could someone who understands the uses of IPNetwork better than > I do explain why the following wouldn't be a significant problem, if __eq__ > and __hash__ were modified to disregard the .ip attribute as suggested: > >>>> linus = IPv4Network('172.16.200.1/24') >>>> snoopy = IPv4Network('172.16.200.3/24') >>>> fqdn = {linus: 'linus.peanuts.net', snoopy: 'snoopy.peanuts.net'} >>>> fqdn[linus] # expecting 'linus.peanuts.net' > 'snoopy.peanuts.net' > > Is this just a problem of education, teaching the users not to abuse > IPv4Network this way? Or is this just an unlikely use of IPv4Network? > Or have I misunderstood the proposal altogether? This gets at why I suggested the docs be organized as I suggested, with 'Network is range of addresses defined by address within range ...' and 'Definition address is retained' *immediately* followed by 'Definition address is mostly ignored, including for comparisons'. The latter caveat should mention the implication for hash() and set/dict membership. The point is to emphasize from the beginning that a network is a network (with an address, that many will ignore), rather than an address (with a network). Terry Jan Reedy
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 3144 review.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list