From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2005-11-10T01:47:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Numeric <=>

Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> Selon ChrisH <chris.hulan@gmail.com>:
>
>> Thanks Eric.  I just wonder why Numeric doesn't implement it
>> properly?
>
> Probably because it can't. I'm not completely up-to-date with the
> Numeric inheritance chain, but I guess for instance Complex numbers
> also inherit from Numeric. Being Numeric doesn't necessarily mean
> that there is a meaningful order among the objects.

Although I agree with your analysis that Numeric can't properly implement
<=> the question remains why <=> is actually implemented in Numeric.  ATM
I cannot see what necessitates it.  Including Comparable is not a reason
IMHO because that will break either way (i.e. with missing <=> and with
incomplete implemented <=>).

> Then again, I'm out on a limb here, and may be completely wrong.

Not completely but I have the feeling we're still not there.  Someone
probably needs to take the time and have a look at the sources...

Kind regards

    robert