On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 7:13 AM Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (You're still not fixing your mail headers. Please do, it's hard to be > bothered responding if I keep having to fix your mails in order to do > so). > Sorry about that, I don't understand where it's coming from. I'm never using google groups. I'm only replying to the emails that are sent to me. I guess gmail's reply-all is gathering the google groups mail from the thread. > On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 11:28, Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > But I'm only asking for fractional powers of -1, 0, and 1. Is that > really a complex issue? > > Yes. (Even ignoring the oh-so-tempting complex number joke ;-)). As > has been seen here there's no agreement on the "right" choice of which > root of -1 to choose. Or possibly more accurately, no-one else is > agreeing with your suggestion that we choose a different option for > the case you're arguing over. > > And to be 100% precise, you asked for the results of three *very > specific* calculations to change. I guess you actually want something > more general - or are you really OK with (for example) > Fraction(-1,1)**Fraction(2,3) changing as you request, but > Fraction(-2,1)**Fraction(2,3) remaining as it currently is? You still > haven't clarified (no-one has particularly asked yet - you may > consider this a request to do so if you like) how you propose in > general that the result of > > Fraction(-1,1) ** Fraction(a, b) > and/or > Fraction(1,1) ** Fraction(a, b) > or maybe even more generally > Fraction(c,d) ** Fraction(a,b) > > would change. What exactly are the special cases you want to define > different results for? What is the process for choosing the result? > > > You are right that the fractional power of -1 and 1 has multiple values, > but the fractional power of zero has a unique value. > > And that part of your proposal has not generated much controversy. > Maybe if you proposed only that, you might get that change made? I > haven't considered the ramifications of that because the discussions > about -1 are obscuring it, but it might be relatively uncontroversial. > > Paul >
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/