Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment: Thanks for the patch!
Comments: (1) Shouldn't 'reverse=True' be omitted in the second doc addition? (2) I'd also suggest adding a brief comment about what this means for distinct, but equal, objects; otherwise it's not really obvious what the point of the doc addition is. (3) As a matter of clarity, perhaps replace "this is" with "max(iterable, key=key) is", and similarly for min. As an aside, I still like Jeffrey Yasskin's suggestion on the python-dev mailing list that the sensible definition for max would maintain the invariant that max(iterable) be equivalent to sorted(iterable)[-1]; see Alexander Stepanov's writings in e.g., http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~musser/gsd/notes-on-programming-2006-10-13.pdf for more. But that's (a) another issue, and (b) perhaps not a significant enough benefit to be worth changing Python's semantics for. ---------- nosy: +jyasskin, mark.dickinson, rhettinger _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9802> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
