"Jeffrey Yasskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's a draft of the numbers ABCs PEP. The most up to date version > will live in the darcs repository at > http://jeffrey.yasskin.info/darcs/PEPs/pep-3141.txt (unless the number > changes) for now. Naming a PEP about numbers 3.141 seems cute, but of > course, I don't get to pick the number. :) This is my first PEP, so > apologies for any obvious mistakes. > > I'd particularly like the numpy people's input on whether I've gotten > floating-point support right. > > Thanks, > Jeffrey Yasskin > > ------------------------------- > PEP: 3141 > Title: A Type Hierarchy for Numbers (and other algebraic entities) > Version: $Revision: 54928 $ > Last-Modified: $Date: 2007-04-23 16:37:29 -0700 (Mon, 23 Apr 2007) $ > Author: Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Status: Draft > Type: Standards Track > Content-Type: text/x-rst > Created: 23-Apr-2007 > Post-History: Not yet posted > > > Abstract > ======== > > This proposal defines a hierarchy of Abstract Base Classes (ABCs) > [#pep3119] to represent numbers and other algebraic entities similar > to numbers. It proposes: [snip]
Are the base number operations in Python all that difficult to understand? Do we really need to add mathematical formalism into Python's type system before people understand the meaning of X * Y? Because all I really see this doing is confusing the hell out of people who aren't mathematicians; I'm a theoretical computer scientist and I had to try to think for a moment to verify that all of those were really necessary to separate the cases. I really do understand wanting to be able to ask "is operation X supported for values Y and Z", but is this really necessary for numbers? - Josiah _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
