[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 326 now online

[Guido van Rossum]

> [Guido]
> > Hm.  cmp is a *builtin function*.  That seems an exceedingly odd place
> > to stick arbitrary constants -- much more so than type objects (like
> > Martin's recently proposed unicode property for controlling error
> > handling).
> 
> If the high/low (or hi/lo, Max/Min, etc.) objects themselves are
> subclasses of object, it may make sense to just place them at
> object.high/object.low.

Why two subclasses?  Shouldn't one with two instances suffice?

> One idea was to create a type called 'extreme', bind it to cmp.extreme,
> and subclass high/low from extreme.  Of course that is just one more
> arbitrary object attached to cmp, which is even more odd.
> 
> Another option would be for min.Min and max.Max, but I'm pretty sure
> that would be confusing.
> 
> The convenient part about putting them as attributes of cmp is that it
> is obvious that they are most useful when it comes to comparing against
> other objects.

I'm not convinced.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)