Do I miss something here, or is the buildbot hit by spammers now?
It looks like it is. If that continues, we have to disable the web
triggers.
Good grief. If anyone has any bright ideas about simple ways to change that
form to make it less vulnerable to the spambots, I'd be happy to
Tim Peters wrote:
Do note that this discussion is only about Python 3. Under the view
that it was a (minor, but real) design error to /try/ extending
Python's integer mod definition to floats, if __mod__, and __divmod__
and __floordiv__ go away for binary floats in P3K they should
certainly
On 23/01/2007 10.20, Brian Warner wrote:
Do I miss something here, or is the buildbot hit by spammers now?
It looks like it is. If that continues, we have to disable the web
triggers.
Good grief. If anyone has any bright ideas about simple ways to change that
form to make it less
Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess the conjugate() function could also just return self (although I see
that conjugate() for a complex with a zero imaginary part returns
something whose imaginary part is -0; is that intentional?
That's wrong, if true: it should return something
[Anders J. Munch]
What design error? float.__mod__ works perfectly.
-1 % 50
49
-1.0 % 50.0
49.0
Please read the whole thread. Maybe you did, but you said nothing
here that indicated you had. The issues aren't about tiny integers
that happen to be in float format, where the result is
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 23/01/2007 10.20, Brian Warner wrote:
Do I miss something here, or is the buildbot hit by spammers now?
It looks like it is. If that continues, we have to disable the web
triggers.
Good grief. If anyone has any bright ideas about simple ways to
Tim For example, floor division isn't mentioned at all in IBM's
Tim proposed decimal standard, or in PEP 327, or in the Python Library
Tim Reference section on `decimal`. It's an artifact of trying to
Tim extend Python's integer mod definition to floats, and for reasons
Tim
Brian Good grief. If anyone has any bright ideas about simple ways to
Brian change that form to make it less vulnerable to the spambots, I'd
Brian be happy to incorporate them into Buildbot.
Require a password? It can be widely known throughout each buildbot
community with little
[Guido]
I guess the conjugate() function could also just return self (although I see
that conjugate() for a complex with a zero imaginary part returns
something whose imaginary part is -0; is that intentional?
[TIm Peters]
That's wrong, if true: it should return something with the opposite
Tim Peters wrote:
Please read the whole thread. Maybe you did, but you said nothing
here that indicated you had. The issues aren't about tiny integers
that happen to be in float format, where the result is exactly
representable as a float too. Those don't create problems for any
definition
[Tim Peters]
Please read the whole thread. Maybe you did, but you said nothing
here that indicated you had. The issues aren't about tiny integers
that happen to be in float format, where the result is exactly
representable as a float too. Those don't create problems for any
definition of
Michael Hudson wrote:
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 23/01/2007 10.20, Brian Warner wrote:
Do I miss something here, or is the buildbot hit by spammers now?
It looks like it is. If that continues, we have to disable the web
triggers.
Good grief. If anyone has any bright ideas
A generic comment. Many of my postings seem to be being misunderstood.
I hold no brief for ANY particular floating-point religion, sect or
heresy, except insofar as it affects robustness and portability (i.e.
software engineering). I can work with and teach almost any model,
and have done so
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 22:27, Tim Peters wrote:
Which is why I don't want binary or decimal floats to support
infix % as a spelling in P3K. I don't believe floating mod is
heavily used, and if so there's scant need for a one-character
spelling -- and if there's a method or function name
Tim Peters wrote:
Which Spec? For example, floor division isn't mentioned at all in
IBM's proposed decimal standard, or in PEP 327, or in the Python
Oops, you're right. My fault, sorry.
Library Reference section on `decimal`. It's an artifact of trying to
extend Python's integer mod
Do note that this discussion is only about Python 3. Under the view
that it was a (minor, but real) design error to /try/ extending
Python's integer mod definition to floats, if __mod__, and __divmod__
and __floordiv__ go away for binary floats in P3K they should
certainly go away for
...
[Facundo]
We'll have to deprecate that functionality, with proper warnings (take
not I'm not following the thread that discuss the migration path to 3k).
And we'll have to add the method remainder to decimal objects (right
now we have only remainder_near in decimal objects, and both
Hello there.
I am trying to insert a hook into python enabling a callback for all
just-created objects. The intention is to debug and find memory leaks, e.g. by
having the hook function insert the object into a WeakKeyDictionary.
I have already added a method to object to set such a hook, and
Hi Tim,
On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 09:08:18PM -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
BTW - isn't that case in contradiction with the general Python rule that
if b 0, then a % b should return a number between 0 included and b
excluded?
Sure.
You're not addressing my point, though, so I was probably not
[Tim Peters]
[Anders J. Munch]
I did read the whole thread, and I saw your -1%1e100 example. Mixing
floating-point numbers of very different magnitude can get you in
trouble - e.g. -1+1e100==1e100. I don't think -1%1e100 is all that
worse.
Except that it's very easy to return an
Nick Maclaren wrote:
... I can work with and teach almost any model,
and have done so with some pretty weird ones.
I think python's model is Whatever your other tools use. Ask them.
And I think that is a reasonable choice.
For sensible input, the various models all work the same.
For dubious
Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... I can work with and teach almost any model,
and have done so with some pretty weird ones.
I think python's model is Whatever your other tools use. Ask them.
And I think that is a reasonable choice.
Answer: It's undefined. Just because you have
Hi,
I'm aware of the problems with signals in a multithreaded application,
but I was using signals in a single-threaded application and noticed
something that seemed wrong. Some signals were apparently being lost,
but when another signal came in the python handler for that lost
signal was being
Tim Peters wrote:
complex_new() ends with:
cr.real -= ci.imag;
cr.imag += ci.real;
and I have no idea what that thinks it's doing. Surely this isn't intended?!:
I think it is. python.org/sf/1642844 adds comments to make it less unclear.
complex(complex(1.0, 2.0),
Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Peters wrote:
complex_new() ends with:
cr.real -= ci.imag;
cr.imag += ci.real;
and I have no idea what that thinks it's doing. Surely this isn't
intended?!
:
I think it is. python.org/sf/1642844 adds comments to make it
On 1/23/07, Kristján V. Jónsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello there.
I am trying to insert a hook into python enabling a callback for all
just-created objects. The intention is to debug and find memory leaks, e.g.
by having the hook function insert the object into a WeakKeyDictionary.
I
[Armin]
BTW - isn't that case in contradiction with the general Python rule that
if b 0, then a % b should return a number between 0 included and b
excluded?
[Tim]
Sure.
[Armin]
You're not addressing my point, though, so I was probably not clear
enough.
Sure is the answer to all possible
Kristján V. Jónsson wrote:
Hello there.
I am trying to insert a hook into python enabling a callback for all
just-created objects. The intention is to debug and find memory leaks,
e.g. by having the hook function insert the object into a WeakKeyDictionary.
I have already added a method
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 07:01, Tim Peters wrote:
complex_new() ends with:
cr.real -= ci.imag;
cr.imag += ci.real;
and I have no idea what that thinks it's doing. Surely this isn't
intended?!:
complex(complex(1.0, 2.0), complex(10.0, 20.0))
(-19+12j)
WTF? In any case,
Kristján V. Jónsson schrieb:
I am trying to insert a hook into python enabling a callback for all
just-created objects. The intention is to debug and find memory leaks,
e.g. by having the hook function insert the object into a WeakKeyDictionary.
I'd like to point out that this isn't a
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007, Ulisses Furquim wrote:
I've read some threads about signals in the archives and I was under
the impression signals should work reliably on single-threaded
applications. Am I right? I've thought about a way to fix this, but I
don't know what is the current plan for
If real and imag are themselves complex numbers, then normalizing
the result will move the imaginary portion of the real vector into
the imaginary part and vice versa.
Not quite.
complex(1,1j)
0j
complex(0,1j)
(-1+0j)
So it moves the imaginary portion of the imag argument into the real
Ulisses Furquim schrieb:
I've read some threads about signals in the archives and I was under
the impression signals should work reliably on single-threaded
applications. Am I right? I've thought about a way to fix this, but I
don't know what is the current plan for signals support in python,
33 matches
Mail list logo
