On Sun., 3 Nov. 2019, 3:29 am Tal Einat, wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 1:54 PM Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri., 1 Nov. 2019, 8:10 am Guido van Rossum, wrote:
>>
>>> It seems a good idea to add __int__ to Fraction, but if you stop falling
>>> back to __trunc__, won't that cause
On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 1:54 PM Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>
> On Fri., 1 Nov. 2019, 8:10 am Guido van Rossum, wrote:
>
>> It seems a good idea to add __int__ to Fraction, but if you stop falling
>> back to __trunc__, won't that cause backwards compatibility issues? I'd say
>> looking for __trunc__
01.11.19 00:03, Guido van Rossum пише:
It seems a good idea to add __int__ to Fraction, but if you stop falling
back to __trunc__, won't that cause backwards compatibility issues?
Most numeric types (int, float, Decimal, NumPy types) implement both
__trunc__ and __int__. The only known
On Sat., 2 Nov. 2019, 7:05 am Antoine Pitrou, wrote:
>
> Did you weigh PEP 602 against PEP 605? Is there a summary of the
> strong points you found for each and how you decided for the former?
>
The summary in PEP 607 was accepted as making a convincing case against the
status quo.
For the
On Fri., 1 Nov. 2019, 8:10 am Guido van Rossum, wrote:
> It seems a good idea to add __int__ to Fraction, but if you stop falling
> back to __trunc__, won't that cause backwards compatibility issues? I'd say
> looking for __trunc__ if the alternative is failing isn't so bad.
>
Aye, converting a
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 3:30 PM Lewis Gaul wrote:
> I'm happy to set up an EnHackathon channel - is IRC or Zulip preferred in
> general?
>
I prefer Zulip since I can easily participate using my phone, as well as
receive email notifications. It also makes searching and following previous
