On 11/13/06, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In which case an immediate transition to error status would seem to > offer a way of providing an effective education. Deprecation may well be > the best way to go for customer-friendliness, but anyone who believes > 1e6 is an int should be hit with a stick.
Right, but what about those people who just didn't examine it? I consider myself a pretty good programmer, and was surprised by Guido's remark. A little quick self-education later, I understood. Still I find the implication that anyone using 1e6 for an integer should be (have all their users) beaten absurd in the context of backwards compatibility. Especially when they were using one of the less apparent floats in a place that accepted floats. Perhaps it would be a fine change for py3k. > Next thing you know some damned fool is going to suggest that 1e6 gets > parsed into a long integer. I can guess why it isn't, but it seems more a matter of ease than a matter of doing what's right. I had expected it to be an int because I thought of 1e6 as a shorthand for (1 * 10 ** 6), which is an int. 1e-6 would be (1 * 10 ** -6) which is a float. 1.0e6 would be (1.0 * 10 ** 6) which would also be a float. Clearly instead the e wins out as the format specifier. I'm not going to argue for it to be turned into an int, or even suggest it, after all compatibility with obscure realities of C is important. I'm just going to say that it makes more sense to me than your reaction indicates. -- Michael Urman http://www.tortall.net/mu/blog _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com