On 06/07/2020 10:44, Federico Salerno wrote:
On 05/07/2020 23:55, Rob Cliffe wrote:
I don't think the new function should be restricted to numbers.
There may be uses for strings, or for user-built classes; why
restrict it unnecessarily?
If it quacks like supporting __lt__ and __gt__, it's a duck.
I'm not opposed to this, although the semantics of calling it with
strings may not be intuitive (does it compare the length? Alphabetic
order? What order is respected for CJK or symbols?); on the other
hand, we already have such behaviour on min() and max() so adding it
to clamp() should reasonably be expected to follow the same logic.
The behaviour for strings should be as per the existing string
comparisons. Anything else would be surprising.
The same goes for objects of any other class that supports the
relational operators.
Although using it for e.g. sets would be unusual and come labelled with
"consenting adults, use at own risk".
Rob Cliffe
_______________________________________________
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/ZIJ32ABLUBMVC7NI4AWAMXYL4ABN2XC3/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
