Dunder docs again (was Pythonic style)

[MRAB]

On 2016-04-28 12:45, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 4:46:43 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
>> On 2016-04-28 06:16, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> > On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:26:21 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >> My rule of thumb is: Dunders are for defining, not for calling. It's
>> >> not a hard-and-fast rule, but it'll get you through 99%+ of
>> >> situations.
>> >
>> > Neat and clever.
>> > Should get in the docs somewhere
>> >
>> Is it worthy of being in the Zen of Python?
>
> :-)
> Thats more than I intended... But heck why not?!
> I find that dunder methods are poorly documented, especially when compared to
> their 'pythonic-ness'.
> Ive spoken of this on and off, eg https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2015-May/691329.html
>
'pythonic-ness'? Surely it's 'pythonicity'! :-)