[issue36095] Better NaN sorting.

[Tim Peters]

Tim Peters <tim at python.org> added the comment:

Marco, your

> I suppose the sorting function checks if the objects of
> the iterable are minor that another object

was incoherent to me.  No idea what "are minor that another object" could possibly mean.

As Mark explained, the mathematical meaning of "orderable" is more expensive to check than it is to do sorting.

Mark also explained that list.sort() guarantees to use only "<" (__lt__) comparisons.  Because your message was incoherent to me (see above), I don't know what purpose would be served by checking ">=" too, but if there _is_ a coherent purpose, list.sort() cannot use ">=" regardless.

Reply to Mark's message instead of this one?  You haven't addressed any of the points he raised, and they're all deal-breakers.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue36095>
_______________________________________