Semantics of ==
axelboldt at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 26 14:45:53 CET 2004
Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> wrote
> What part of the semantics are you unclear about? Two sequences are
> equal if they are element-wise equal.
That definition is circular.
> That is the definition that people rely on,
> that's the definition that the interpreter uses,
> and that definition is even consistent with the behavior you saw with the
> self-referencing lists which for some reason surprised you.
Yes, s==w is consistent with the definition, but s!=w would also have
been consistent with it.
Consider for instance the following definition:
* all strings and numbers are called "well-founded"
* a list is called well-founded if and only if all its elements are
Is l well-founded? Both answers "yes" and "no" are consistent with the
above definition. If you write a program to determine whether a given
list is well-founded, it will run into an infinite loop. Similarly, if
you try to write a program implementing the above simple-minded
definition of list-equality, it'll run into an infinite loop. Since
Python does not run into an infinite loop, it must use a different
More information about the Python-list