➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2016-09-28 09:14 by Wheerd, last changed 2022-04-11 14:58 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| counter_comparison.patch | Wheerd, 2016-09-28 09:14 | A patch file with an implementation | review | |
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg277597 - (view) | Author: Manuel Krebber (Wheerd) * | Date: 2016-09-28 09:14 | |
I would really like there to be comparison operators for collection.Counter similar to the ones for sets. While you can now use minus to some degree for that comparison, it is very inefficient. I have attached an implementation of __ge__ and __le__ as a patch. I could also provide the necessary additions to the documentation, if that is desired. |
|||
| msg277598 - (view) | Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) *  |
Date: 2016-09-28 09:18 | |
This is a duplicate of issue22515. |
|||
| msg277601 - (view) | Author: Manuel Krebber (Wheerd) * | Date: 2016-09-28 09:51 | |
Oh, I should have searched properly before creating this ticket. Sorry about that. I guess I will be subclassing Counter in my project then, to get this functionality... Only problem is, that when using the builtin __add__ etc. of my Counter subclass, I will get a Counter instance, that does not support ordering... So I guess I will not use it at all. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:58:37 | admin | set | github: 72483 |
| 2016-09-28 13:43:55 | r.david.murray | set | status: open -> closed |
| 2016-09-28 09:51:05 | Wheerd | set | messages: + msg277601 |
| 2016-09-28 09:18:28 | serhiy.storchaka | set | nosy:
+ rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka messages: + msg277598 resolution: duplicate superseder: Implement partial order on Counter |
| 2016-09-28 09:14:43 | Wheerd | create | |