From 94153096f5bb3dd19989d83ffbc38f140828ae3a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hettinger Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 03:09:25 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Closes SF patch: 552468. Type class unification invalidated the statement: x.__getitem__[i] is not equivalent to x[i]. --- Doc/ref/ref3.tex | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Doc/ref/ref3.tex b/Doc/ref/ref3.tex index 3e5b2c3d58b..f1fecf0e5d6 100644 --- a/Doc/ref/ref3.tex +++ b/Doc/ref/ref3.tex @@ -897,10 +897,8 @@ syntax (such as arithmetic operations or subscripting and slicing) by defining methods with special names. For instance, if a class defines a method named \method{__getitem__()}, and \code{x} is an instance of this class, then \code{x[i]} is equivalent to -\code{x.__getitem__(i)}. (The reverse is not true --- if \code{x} is -a list object, \code{x.__getitem__(i)} is not equivalent to -\code{x[i]}.) Except where mentioned, attempts to execute an -operation raise an exception when no appropriate method is defined. +\code{x.__getitem__(i)}. Except where mentioned, attempts to execute +an operation raise an exception when no appropriate method is defined. \withsubitem{(mapping object method)}{\ttindex{__getitem__()}} When implementing a class that emulates any built-in type, it is