On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
I think it is highly unlikely that people will be frightened off from overloading @ by the name. If people happily use __lt__ for subset checking, which is *nothing* like less-than,
Actually, no. <, or "less than", is the exact way it's spelled for any partial order, and subset relations are probably the most famous non-numeric example of a partial order. In fact, if you look at the most common construction of the natural numbers (0 = frozenset(), succ(x) = frozenset(x) | x), it is more complicated than it needs to be only so that the < operator means the same thing for natural numbers when treated as numbers or as sets.
It'd be like if we had "__twos_complement_bitwise_and__".
Having __matmul__ would be like if we had __xor__ __pow__ __sub__ __div__ __mod__ __pos__ or __neg__
Then we disagree. -- Devin