On 8/24/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Another change that is unlikely to be available in 2.x is the > rationalization of comparisons. In 3.0, "1 < 'abc'" will raise a > TypeError; there's just no way to backport this behavior, since again > it requires pervasive changes to the implementation.
I still believe that this breaks an important current use case for sorting, but maybe the right answer is a different (but similar) API. Given an arbitrary collection of objects, I want to be able to order them in a consistent manner, at least within a single interpreter session. (Consistency across sessions/machines/persistence/etc would be even better, but isn't essential.) The current sort method works pretty well; the new one wouldn't. It would be enough (and arguably an improvement, because of broken objects) if there were a consistent_order equivalent that just caught the TypeError and then tried a fallback for you until it found an answer. -jJ _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
