> Since what I _really_ wanted from this was the intersection of the > objects (based on attribute 2), I was looking for a set-based > solution, > kinda like a decorate - <set operation> - undecorate pattern. Perhaps > the problem does not fall into that category.
The "kinda" part is where the idea falls down. If you've decorated the inputs with a key function (like the key= argument to sorted()), then the intersection step will return only a single element result, not both matches as you specified in your original request. IOW, you cannot get set([(2, 1, 3), (1, 3, 3)]) as a result if both set members are to be treated as equal. It would be rather like writing set([1]).intersection(set([1.0])) and expecting to get set([1, 1.0]) as a result. Does your intuition support having an intersection return a set larger than either of the two inputs? Raymond -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
