On 10/24/05, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, if we're all in agreement, what's required for it to actually
change? ;-)
Someone with time, motivation, a detailed plan, and the ability to
convince Guido.
Most of the difficulty is in actually removing the NotImplemented name
from
Fred Drake wrote:
On 10/21/05, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the very least NotImplementedComparision or
NotImplementedOperandForType would be more explicit...
Indeed. We (and many others in the Python community) are in complete
agreement on this.
Well, if we're all in
Fred Drake wrote:
On 10/20/05, Chris Withers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What an unfortunate name, I'd have called it Uncomparable on some such...
While the current name is unfortunate, and Uncomparable would make the
two easier to distinguish, Uncomparable would also be wrong. (If a
Fred Drake wrote:
A rich-comparison method should return NotImplemented to indicate that
it doesn't implement the specific comparison; the response should be
for Python to allow the other operand a chance to handle the
comparison (inverted, of course).
Oh :-(
What an unfortunate name, I'd
In the Zope 3 book the method is like this:
def makeTestObject(self):
raise NotImplemented()
...
Looking in some real zope3 tests I saw another version of the method:
def makeTestObject(self):
raise NotImplementedError()
NotImplemented is a singleton object, introduced in 2.1 (I
