TypeVar for SupportsAllComparisons
#28
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Many comparison types, like
SupportsRichComparison, have a...Tvariation which allows for generics bound by that comparison type. There was not one forSupportsAllComparisons, so this patch simply adds one to obviate the need for users to do the same.I have named this TypeVar in the style of all the others (namely
SupportsAllComparisonsT); however, I wonder if this should in fact be given a more general name such as the Java-styleComparableandComparableT? That it's nonobvious (to me, at least, ymmv) whichSupportsXXXprotocol to use is slightly unfortunate and having one named such that This Is Meant To Be The One To Use might go a ways to improving this. If you feel differently, that's fine too (I can qualify the import to call it whatever I please, after all; it's mostly a discoverability issue for me.)Thanks!