[docs] [issue4395] Document auto __ne__ generation; provide a use case for non-trivial __ne__

Martin Panter report at bugs.python.org
Sat Jan 24 13:40:46 CET 2015

Martin Panter added the comment:

The reference to @functools.total_ordering was actually already there; I just moved it into the paragraph about relationships between the operators. I should also point out that my description of the default __ne__() assumes that Issue 21408 is resolved; the current behaviour is slightly different.

If you think something else could be added to the patch, I’m happy to try and add it. Perhaps the default object.__eq__() behaviour?


Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>

More information about the docs mailing list