Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] python: simplify complicated conditional assignment

At Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:24:16 -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > > On 08/21/2013 08:05 AM, Claudio Bley wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Bley <cbley(a)av-test.de&gt; > > --- > > Just noticed this while reading the generated .py files. > > > > Might save a few cycles eventually... > > > > python/generator.py | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > ACK. Thanks. But, I was still thinking about a possible case where doing the assignment in this way was necessary or useful. In the case if someone actually overwrites the __ne__ operator of a class in some strange way: def __ne__(self, other): if other is None: return False else: return NotImplemented (and __eq__ likewise), such that the instance would compare equal to None, the semantic of the codes would differ. IMO, we don't need to care if someone chooses to implement such awkward equality rules. In the end, (s)he could directly pass None as an argument if None is what is inteded. So, I'm going to push this if nobody objects in the next few hours.