Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: castironpi <castironpi@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
On May 16, 9:10 am, castironpi <castiro...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 16, 8:35 am, castironpi <castiro...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 16, 8:18 am, castironpi <castiro...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 16, 7:23 am, Bruno Desthuilliers <bruno.
42.desthuilli...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kay Schluehr a écrit :
On 16 Mai, 10:03, "A.T.Hofkamp" <h...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello all,
Yesterday we found the cause of a bug that has caused problems for a long time.
It appeared to be the following:
class A(object):
pass
print min(1.0, A())
which is accepted by Python even though the A() object is not numerical in
nature.
The cause of this behavior seems to be the compare operation of the object
class.
Is there a way to disable this behavior in Python (other than deriving a new
'object-like' class that doesn't do comparisons?)
Are you sure you don't want to use a statically typed language that
captures all type errors just by inspecting your source code?
This is not necessarily a static vs dynamic typing problem. The
following code will raise a TypeError for very good reasons:
print 1.0 + A()- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I question the real-world examples of coercion, casting, and
upcasting. C insists that defining by operator, which may or may not
relate to system, is the only legal move. I doubt operator+ is well-
defined on non-ideal structures. Rationals are not floats, but system
got checked. Define concurrency.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I would be bouncing localcy and remoticy. What word's on the bar?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Can you suffixize words? I have corner, cornercy, lunacy, emphatic,
emphasize, a value of Y, orderings, say, remoticy, & cross. Come do
graphics. Anybody speak?
For verbs, I have: say, speak, see, talk, and stack. Pretty
harmless. Still here?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
That's stay tuned I'M BARTENDER. Is that a space BAR ZOOP.
.
- References:
- default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: A.T.Hofkamp
- Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: Kay Schluehr
- Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: Bruno Desthuilliers
- Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: castironpi
- Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: castironpi
- Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- From: castironpi
- default object comparison considered harmful?
- Prev by Date: Re: writing python extensions in assembly
- Next by Date: Re: Instance of class "object"
- Previous by thread: Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- Next by thread: Re: default object comparison considered harmful?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|