On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Sven Marnach firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Both proposals define proper equivalence classes -- there is no difference in this regard.
I know. My point was that the equivalence classes "match up" in a way -- each equivalence class in the "as sequence" proposal comprises exactly one or more of the equivalence classes in the "as start/stop/step" proposal.
(This is also why I had an aside about __hash__: each equivalence class for __hash__ comprises exactly one or more of the equivalence classes for __eq__.)