On 07.07.20 19:41, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> Dominik Vilsmeier writes:
>
>   > So if you're dealing with items views and want to compare them to a set
>   > representing dict items, then you need an extra `try/except` in order to
>   > handle non-hashable values in the items view.
>
> Sounds like you have a change to propose here, then.  Put the
> try/except in the __eq__ for the items view class when comparing
> against a set.  I would expect it to be accepted, as comparing items
> views is pretty expensive so the slight additional overhead would
> likely be acceptable, and if you get the exception, you know the
> equality comparison against a set is false since a set cannot contain
> that element, so this possibility can't affect worst-case performance
> by much, if at all.

So it seems there is a consensus on the fact that this is undesirable
behavior and it can be fixed relatively easy.

What's the next step then? Should this be discussed further on the
mailing list? Should I open an issue at bpo?
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/G7N7WV5C6JKLIFAA5NGUXW7VEH4CMRKT/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/