Why is the cmp parameter removed from sort/sorted in Python3.0?

Question

from python wiki:
In Py3.0, the cmp parameter was removed entirely (as part of a larger effort to simplify and unify the language, eliminating the conflict between rich comparisons and the __cmp__ methods).

I do not understand the reasoning why cmp is removed in py3.0

consider this example:

>>> def numeric_compare(x, y):
        return x - y
>>> sorted([5, 2, 4, 1, 3], cmp=numeric_compare)
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

and now consider this version (recommended and compatible with 3.0):

def cmp_to_key(mycmp):
    'Convert a cmp= function into a key= function'
    class K(object):
        def __init__(self, obj, *args):
            self.obj = obj
        def __lt__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) < 0
        def __gt__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) > 0
        def __eq__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) == 0
        def __le__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) <= 0
        def __ge__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) >= 0
        def __ne__(self, other):
            return mycmp(self.obj, other.obj) != 0
    return K

>>> sorted([5, 2, 4, 1, 3], key=cmp_to_key(reverse_numeric))
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]

The latter is very verbose and the same purpose is achieved in the former with just one line. On another note, I am writing my custom class for which I want to write the __cmp__ method. from my little reading across web, it is recommended to write __lt__,__gt__,__eq__,__le__,__ge__,__ne__ and not __cmp__
Again, why this recommendation? can I not just define __cmp__ making life simpler?

Asked By: brain storm

||

Source

Answer 1

cmp was removed because the key attribute to .sort() and sorted() is superior in most cases. It was a hold-over from C more than anything, and was confusing to boot. Having to implement a separate __cmp__ method next to the rich comparison operators (__lt__, __gt__, etc.) was befuddling and unhelpful.

You can always use functools.cmp_to_key() to adapt an existing cmp function.

Your specific example could have been implemented without a key function, of course, as integers are already orderable; just add reverse=True.

For custom classes, use the @functools.total_ordering decorator to expand a __eq__ and one comparison operator method (e.g. __lt__, or __gt__, etc.) into a full ordering implementation.

Answered By: Martijn Pieters

Answer 2

For two objects a and b, __cmp__ requires that one of a < b, a == b, and a > b is true. But that might not be the case: consider sets, where it’s very common that none of those are true, e.g. {1, 2, 3} vs {4, 5, 6}.

So __lt__ and friends were introduced. But that left Python with two separate ordering mechanisms, which is kind of ridiculous, so the less flexible one was removed in Python 3.

You don’t actually have to implement all six comparison methods. You can use the @total_ordering decorator and only implement __lt__ and __eq__.

edit: Also note that, in the case of sorting, key functions can be more efficient than cmp: in the example you gave, Python may have to call your Python comparison function O(n²) times. But a key function only needs to be called O(n) times, and if the return value is then a builtin type (as it very often is), the O(n²) pairwise comparisons go through C.

Answered By: Eevee

Why is the cmp parameter removed from sort/sorted in Python3.0?

Question:

Answers: