30.09.18 09:05, Ken Hilton пише:
Reading the iNaN discussion, most of the opposition seems to be that
adding iNaN would add a new special value to integers and therefore add
new complexity.
I propose, instead, that we make None a subclass of int (or even a
certain value of int) to represent iNaN. Therefore:
>>> None + 1, None - 1, None * 2, None / 2, None // 2
(None, None, None, nan, None) # mathematical operations on NaN
return NaN
>>> None & 1, None | 1, None ^ 1
# I'm not sure about this one. The following could be plausible:
(0, 1, 1)
# or this might make more sense, as this *is* NaN we're talking about:
(None, None, None)
>>> isinstance(None, int)
True # the whole point of this idea
>>> issubclass(type(None), int)
True # no matter whether None *is* an int or just a subclass, this
will be true as issubclass(int, int) is True
I know this is a crazy idea, but I thought it could have some merit, so
why not throw it out here?
This will make some errors passing silently (instead of raising a
TypeError or AttributeError earlier) and either cause errors far from
the initial place or producing an incorrect result.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
