On 1/7/2018 12:25 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Eric V. Smith <eric@trueblade.com <mailto:eric@trueblade.com>> wrote:
On 1/3/2018 1:17 PM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
I’ll open an issue after I have time to read this thread and comment on it.
https://bugs.python.org/issue32513 <https://bugs.python.org/issue32513> I need to think though how __eq__ and __ne__ work, as well as the ordering operators.
My specific concern with __ne__ is that there's one flag to control their generation, but python will use "not __eq__" if you don't provide __ne__. I need to think through what happens if the user only provides __eq__: does dataclasses do nothing, does it add __ne__, and how does this interact with a base class that does provide __ne__.
Maybe dataclasses should only ever provide __eq__ and always assume Python's default for __ne__ kicks in? If that's not acceptable (maybe there are cases where a user did write an explicit __ne__ that needs to be overridden) I would recommend the following rule:
- If there's an __eq__, don't do anything (regardless of whether there's an __ne__) - If there no __eq__ but there is an __ne__, generate __eq__ but don't generate __ne__ - If neither exists, generate both
I've added my proposal on issue 32513: https://bugs.python.org/issue32513#msg310392 It's long, so I won't repeat it here. The only really confusing part is __hash__ and its interaction with __eq__. Eric.