# Reversed ops in operator module

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/reversed-ops-in-operator-module/24949>\
**Category:** Ideas\
**Created:** [March 17, 2023, 5:08pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/reversed-ops-in-operator-module/24949 "2023-03-17T17:08:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tjreedy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/tjreedy/32/137_2.png) [@tjreedy](https://discuss.python.org/u/tjreedy)\
**Post date:** [March 17, 2023, 6:27pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/reversed-ops-in-operator-module/24949/2 "2023-03-17T18:27:15Z")

</div>

Why would it be ‘nice’, especially when you can trivially implement such?

The operator module exposes the C functions that implement the operators. Each C function calls the normal and reversed dunder methods as appropriate. There are no reversed functions to expose.

IOW, `a+b` is compiled, in CPython, to a binary add functions that may call either `a. __add__ (b)` or `b. __radd__ (a)` or both as appropriate and necessary.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/reversed-ops-in-operator-module/24949)._