Eli Bendersky <eliben@gmail.com> added the comment: Nick, I read the protocol of issue 4296 and I understand the reasoning behind the code, but I still think the naming is mightily confusing. Two distinct changes went into a single function (A) Return -1/0/+1 instead of PyObject and (B) the id() shortcut, and its name is inappropriate. Were an API change feasible, some other naming would be better.
"It may be worth explicitly pointing out that use cases where this assumption is unacceptable would be better served by direct invocation RichCompare function."
Do you mean write it down in the docs? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10912> _______________________________________