[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-23 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Thanks, Ezio; I didn't get around to dealing with this as quickly as I meant to. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438 ___

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-22 Thread Ezio Melotti
Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com: -- resolution: - fixed stage: commit review - committed/rejected status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-22 Thread Roundup Robot
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset ad0712f4b3e0 by Ezio Melotti in branch '2.7': #15438: add a note to math.pow() that suggests using **/pow() for integers. Patch by Mark Dickinson. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/ad0712f4b3e0 New changeset 7d95a0aa6b5a by Ezio Melotti in branch

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-16 Thread Ezio Melotti
Ezio Melotti added the comment: LGTM. (Maybe build the doc and double check that all the links are correct before committing.) -- stage: needs patch - commit review ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-10 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Updated patch. Thanks Ezio and David for reviewing. -- assignee: - mark.dickinson priority: low - normal Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file29033/issue15438_2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-02-10 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Whoops. Removing a bonus non-grammatical 'function'. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file29034/issue15438_3.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-01-27 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Anyone wants to suggest a specific wording? How about the attached patch? -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28870/issue15438.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-01-27 Thread R. David Murray
R. David Murray added the comment: I don't think it should be .. note, but otherwise it looks fine to me. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438 ___

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-01-07 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: -- nosy: -serhiy.storchaka ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438 ___ ___

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2013-01-07 Thread Ezio Melotti
Ezio Melotti added the comment: Well, the math.pow() doc could use a seealso pointing to the built-in pow() function perhaps. Pointing to ``**`` is probably better. I think that a simple note that mentions the ** operator and when it's better to use it (and possibly the limitations of

[issue15438] document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers

2012-07-28 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Changing the incredible issue title :-) -- title: Incredible issue in math.pow - document that math.pow is inappropriate for integers ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15438