The default is currently None, which is [then changed to is_param_compatible_with if None] [https://github.com/i2mint/i2/blob/7c4f70e3614e2bdda4093ebb7d27c345d86ba16d/i2/signatures.py#L4291].
Two things here:
- Perhaps defining
param_comparator=is_param_compatible_with in the definition is better? (One con: Signature less readable. Big pro: More explicit). This pattern shows up again in is_param_compatible_with arguments
- Is this default might be exactly what we need for
is_call_compatible_with (is it? see is_default_value_compatible_with for example) but is not strong enough for a default signature comparison, nor flexibility enough for the general signature comparison use cases.
The default is currently
None, which is [then changed tois_param_compatible_withifNone] [https://github.com/i2mint/i2/blob/7c4f70e3614e2bdda4093ebb7d27c345d86ba16d/i2/signatures.py#L4291].Two things here:
param_comparator=is_param_compatible_within the definition is better? (One con: Signature less readable. Big pro: More explicit). This pattern shows up again inis_param_compatible_withargumentsis_call_compatible_with(is it? seeis_default_value_compatible_withfor example) but is not strong enough for a default signature comparison, nor flexibility enough for the general signature comparison use cases.