Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> added the comment:
>From a user point of view, your edit makes it look like they have to supply >__ne__() if they want support for the != operator. The user would have to >know the subtle details of the language to know this is not the case. In >documentation, more so than in code, explicit is better than implicit. The tables that we have now do a good job of communicating, "if you supply these methods, then these other methods follow automatically". It matters very little where those methods were defined in the __mro__. In Python 2.7, collections.Set used to explicitly define __ne__ and now it just inherits it from object, but that is close to being just an implementation detail. From a user point of view, it is the same. It would fine to add a technical implementation note somewhere, perhaps as a footnote to the "Mixin Methods" column. But mostly, the documentation is more useful and clear as it stands now. In my professional life, I teach engineers directly from these tables, so I have extensive experience with the user's point of view on these particular docs. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue41400> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
