On Sat, Jul 07, 2018 at 01:03:06PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote: > Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote: > >(while "<>" reads "less or greater" which is mathematically not > >equivalent to that: not everything has a defined ordering relation. > > I think this is a silly argument against "<>".
While I agree with your conclusions, I'd just like to point out that given the existence of float NANs, there's a case to be made for having separate <> and != operators with != keeping the "not equal" meaning and the <> operator meaning literally "less than, or greater than". py> NAN != 23 True py> NAN < 23 or NAN > 23 False (I'm not making the case for this, just pointing out that it exists...) There would be precedent too: at least one of Apple's SANE maths libraries back in the 1990s had a full set of NAN-aware comparison operators including IIRC separate "not equal" and "less than or greater than" comparisons. But I think this is a corner of IEEE-754 esoterica that probably doesn't need to be a builtin operator :-) Also: py> from __future__ import barry_as_FLUFL py> 23 <> 42 True -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
