Issue1141428
Created on 2005-02-18 00:42 by jimjjewett, last changed 2005-08-24 09:09 by georg.brandl.
| File name |
Uploaded |
Description |
Edit |
Remove |
|
test_richcmp.diff
|
jimjjewett,
2005-02-25 00:20
|
|
|
|
|
seq_tests.diff2
|
jimjjewett,
2005-03-04 19:32
|
adding an in-order check to seq_tests |
|
|
|
msg47802 - (view) |
Author: Jim Jewett (jimjjewett) |
Date: 2005-02-18 00:42 |
|
Recently, there was a change to speed up
__contains__.
x in (1, 2, 3) would be compiled as
x in frozenset(1, 2, 3).
This was backed out, because frozensets raise a
typeerror when asked about unhashable objects.
These objects *can't* be in the set, but there was
concern about supporting objects in which a mutable
and an immutable compare equal.
So long as that is a requirement, it should be tested.
The new test for sequences ensures that they will use
__eq__ (and not rely on __hash__) in the future.
The change to the rich compare tests is just a
comment, pointing out that dicts can rely on
__hash__ as well as __eq__.
|
|
msg47803 - (view) |
Author: Michael Chermside (mcherm) |
Date: 2005-02-23 13:26 |
|
Logged In: YES
user_id=99874
In the change to test_richcmp.diff, you should move the
period to the end of the sentence.
That being said, I'm +1 on applying this patch. I certainly
agree that we should add the test since we care about
preserving the behavior.
|
|
msg47804 - (view) |
Author: Jim Jewett (jimjjewett) |
Date: 2005-02-25 00:22 |
|
Logged In: YES
user_id=764593
Period moved, per mcherm's comment.
|
|
msg47805 - (view) |
Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) |
Date: 2005-08-24 07:17 |
|
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Check in for Py2.5 only.
|
|
msg47806 - (view) |
Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) |
Date: 2005-08-24 09:09 |
|
Logged In: YES
user_id=1188172
Committed as test_richcmp.py r1.11 and seq_tests.py r1.5.
|
|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2005-02-18 00:42:23 | jimjjewett | create | |
|