On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:53 AM Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benja...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 at 02:01, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 09:43:42PM +0100, Oscar Benjamin wrote: > > > On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 at 19:38, Steve Barnes <gadgetst...@live.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > I converted to int because I needed a whole number, this was intended > > > > > to > > > > represent some more complex process where a value is converted to a > > > > whole number down in the depths of the processing. > > > > > > Your requirement to have a whole number cannot meaningfully be > > > satisfied if your input is nan so an exception is the most useful > > > result. > > > > Not to Steve it isn't. > > > > Be careful about making value judgements like that: Steve is asking for > > an integer NAN because for *him* an integer NAN is more useful than an > > exception. You shouldn't tell him that he is wrong, unless you know his > > use-case and his code, which you don't. > > Then he can catch the exception and do something else. If I called > int(x) because my subsequent code "needed a whole number" then I would > definitely not want to end up with a nan. The proposal requested is > that int(x) could return something other than a well defined integer. > That would break a lot of code!
At no point was the behaviour of int(x) ever proposed to be changed. Don't overreact here. The recommended use-case was for a library to return iNaN instead of None when it is unable to return an actual value. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
