Greg Ewing wrote: > On 4/03/20 7:42 am, Steve Jorgensen wrote: > > That's a much better term. Orderable and > > ProtoOrderable. > > I would suggest "TotallyOrdered" and "PartiallyOrdered".
Possibly, but the reasoning is not obvious to me. Can you explain? I get that `TotallyOrdered` is consistent with https://docs.python.org/2/library/functools.html#functools.total_ordering, but I don't get the `PartialyOrdered` term. In case I was not sufficiently clear about my proposal (just making sure) the `Proto`… in my concept simply means that the determination of whether the class is orderable is explicit and not determined by whether the rich comparison methods are present. A class that has `ProtoOrderable` but not `Orderable` as an actual or virtual subclass is not orderable, but a class that is not a sublcass of either is assumed to be orderable if it implements all the rich comparison methods. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/LU3UFEXBQZJS2TUZQFCPVFH7Q37I62E7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
