On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 17:59:10 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > Aside from the backward compatibility concerns (which mean that this > can't be done in a language that calls itself "Python"), I'm not seeing > any reason that a human-friendly language can't spend most of its time > working with arbitrary-precision rationals, only switching to floats > when (a) the programmer explicitly requests it, or (b) when performing > operations that fundamentally cannot be performed with rationals.
True, it can't be called Python. But it could be called EvenSlowerThanPythonYouReallyDontWantToDoAnySeriousNumericWorkWithThis instead. *wink* -- Steven D'Aprano “You are deluded if you think software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can write virtualization layers without security holes.” —Theo de Raadt -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
