On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Here's a counter-example that supports the current behaviour:
>
> >>> from enum import IntFlag, auto
> >>> class Spam(IntFlag):
> ... FOO = auto()
> ... BAR = auto()
> ... FOOBAR = FOO | BAR
> ... SPAM = auto()
> ... HAM
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> It this point I do not. If you can give us an example Enum and why it's
> necessary to be built like that I might be swayed -- although the odds are
> good that the change will go into aenum instead (it's already a mess with
> the 2.7 compatib
On 04/03/2017 01:53 AM, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Python code is executed top-down. First FOO, then BAR, then BAZ. It is not
saved up and executed later in random
order. Or, put another way, the value was appropriate when it was chosen -- it
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> Python code is executed top-down. First FOO, then BAR, then BAZ. It is
> not saved up and executed later in random order. Or, put another way, the
> value was appropriate when it was chosen -- it is not the fault of auto()
> that the user
On 04/02/2017 09:49 PM, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
The current behavior of `auto` is to pick a value which is one plus the
previous value.
Starting with 1 if no previous value exists.
It would probably be better if `auto` instead picked a value that is not
used by any named member (either the mini
While "the current behaviour is compliant with what the docs say" is true,
saying "as such, I would be disinclined to change the code" misses the
point.
The current documentation allows for multiple behaviors. The current
implementation has an chosen to add an arbitrary undocumented restriction
on
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
> "If the exact value is unimportant you may use auto instances and an
> appropriate value will be chosen for you."
>
> Choosing a value that conflicts with BAZ in above cases doesn't seem
> "appropriate" for a value that is "unimportant".
>
> T
The current behavior of `auto` is to pick a value which is one plus the
previous value.
It would probably be better if `auto` instead picked a value that is not
used by any named member (either the minimal unused value, or the minimal
higher than the previous value). That is, in this simple case:
