On 2/8/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > #1653736 reports that slot_nb_inplace_power has the wrong > type: it should be a ternary function, but only is a binary. > The proposed change is to make it ternary, and to invoke __ipow__ > with three arguments. > > In researching this, I came to wonder why nb_inplace_power is > ternary in the first place. It is the implementation of > > foo **= bar > > (and that's its only use), so it ought to be binary. Historically, > the reason probably is that it was copied from nb_power, which is > ternary because it also implements pow()). > > So here is my proposed change: > > 1. For 2.5.1, rewrite slot_nb_inplace_power to raise an exception > if the third argument is not None, and then invoke __ipow__ > with only one argument. > > 2. For 2.6, change the API to make nb_inplace_power binary. > > Optionally, in 2.5, the exception could be added into other places > as well, e.g. PyNumber_InPlacePower and instance_ipow (rather than > invoking __ipow__ with a third argument if its not None). > > Comments? >
Seems reasonable to me. Is the argument of None passed in automatically somewhere? I think the 2.6 change is definitely good, just don't know if the exception is really needed. I realize the signature is off, but it doesn't hurt anyone at this point if it stayed wrong since obviously the semantics would be the same as they were. -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
