Hacker News Reader

dataclasses makes it easy to just add your own `__eq__` method, if the default doesn't suit you. You just define it! Nothing else is required.

So I wouldn't be so quick to abandon dataclasses in such a case.

View on HN

> dataclasses makes it easy to just add your own `__eq__` method, if the default doesn't suit you. You just define it! Nothing else is required.

That's completely besides the point, and lots of non-data objects should not be equatable at all, if they even can technically be.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that `__eq__` shouldn't be implemented at all? There's a switch for that, too.

I was merely noting that dataclasses are mostly intended for data holder objects (hence data classes), and thus defaulting to structural equality makes perfect sense, even ignoring it being overridable or disableable.

This was in reply to this objection:

> eq is a property of the domain itself; two objects are only equal if it makes sense in the domain logic for them to be equal, and in many cases that equality is more or less complicated than attribute equality.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com