On 2 Apr 2013 19:04, "Antoine Pitrou" <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > > Le Tue, 2 Apr 2013 09:53:41 +0100, > Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Mark Shannon <m...@hotpy.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hence my original question: what *should* the semantics be? > > > > > > > > I like Nick's answer to that: int *should* always return something of > > exact type int. Otherwise you're always left wondering whether you > > have to do "int(int(x))", or perhaps even "int(int(int(x)))", to be > > absolutely sure of getting an int. > > Agreed.
Perhaps we should start emitting a DeprecationWarning for int subclasses returned from __int__ and __index__ in 3.4? (I like the idea of an explicit error over implicit conversion to the base type, so deprecation of subtypes makes sense as a way forward. We should check the other type coercion methods, too.) Cheers, Nick. > > Antoine. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________ 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
