{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/35","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/35/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/35/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/35/events","html_url":"https://github.com/hynek/characteristic/issues/35","id":91158090,"number":35,"title":"Update docs with mention of how @with_cmp affects .__hash__()","user":{"login":"paulie-g","id":11264484,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/11264484?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g","html_url":"https://github.com/paulie-g","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":3,"created_at":"2015-06-26T05:21:34Z","updated_at":"2015-06-27T05:04:19Z","closed_at":null,"body":"I have run into this use case a few times now: I want all of characteristic's goodness for the entire set of attributes, but it only makes sense for .\\_\\_hash\\_\\_() to reference some subset of of them, because the rest are not meaningful in that context. Characteristic already has a facility to make this distinction for compares (with_cmp/exclude_from_cmp) and I'd like to submit a PR that does it for hashes as well in an analogous manner.\r\n\r\nAny objections @hynek ? :+1: "},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/comments/115961691","html_url":"https://github.com/hynek/characteristic/issues/35#issuecomment-115961691","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hynek/characteristic/issues/35","id":115961691,"user":{"login":"paulie-g","id":11264484,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/11264484?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g","html_url":"https://github.com/paulie-g","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/paulie-g/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-27T05:04:19Z","updated_at":"2015-06-27T05:04:19Z","body":"Thanks for the pointer, I'll be using attrs from now on. It's got a number of small improvements, but there are so many that it adds up to a big difference in usability and elegance. As far as mutable members interacting with hashes goes, that's expected. There are several ways of dealing with that edge case, but none are general enough imo to make them foolproof, so I'd say leaving the burden with the user is acceptable there.\r\n\r\nThe pull request is just a doc change, no hurry there."}}