Eric Smith wrote:
Note that in
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-February/077062.html,
Guido advocates not adding the __bin__ machinery, which is what lead to
the simple implementation of bin() just calling PyNumber_ToBase and
relying on __index__.
I don't think __bin__
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I'd prefer to see a proper PEP for this proposing a new slot that lets any
class return an (integer_part, fraction_part) tuple of integers, and
have PyNumber_ToBase take care of the actual string formatting.
I take issue only with your notion of
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Smith wrote:
Note that in
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-February/077062.html, Guido
advocates not adding the __bin__ machinery, which is what lead to the simple
implementation of bin() just calling
Guido van Rossum wrote:
The 3.0 approach means that non-float floating point types still can't be
displayed properly by bin()/oct()/hex().
Nor can float, AFAICT from the current 3.0 tree.
$ ./python
Python 3.0b1+ (py3k:64491:64497M, Jun 24 2008, 07:14:03)
[GCC 4.1.2 20070626 (Red Hat
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Eric Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
The 3.0 approach means that non-float floating point types still can't be
displayed properly by bin()/oct()/hex().
Nor can float, AFAICT from the current 3.0 tree.
$ ./python
Python 3.0b1+
I'm curious why the addition of a new feature, past beta 1, was
constrained entirely to a single tracker issue. Clearly not enough
people were aware of it (or there wouldn't be the discussion about it
here).
Following the discussion in the issue tracker is really hard (since
most of the
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Following the discussion in the issue tracker is really hard (since
most of the discussion apparently refers to earlier versions). I also
don't see any doc changes.
I think there may also still be room for some
I think there may also still be room for some additional discussion
on the output format;
If so, I think the change should be reverted, and the feature deferred
to 2.7/3.1.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
[Mark Dickinson]
I think there may also still be room for some additional discussion
on the output format;
[Martin v. Löwis]
If so, I think the change should be reverted, and the feature deferred
to 2.7/3.1.
It looks like pretty much every aspect of this change was discussed /
reviewed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jun 24, 2008, at 4:13 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
[Mark Dickinson]
I think there may also still be room for some additional discussion
on the output format;
[Martin v. Löwis]
If so, I think the change should be reverted, and the feature
I thought there was a discussion of this earlier, and the idea was to
leave the prior implementation, because that's how it's implemented in
3.0. bin() is a new feature in 2.6, so there's no particular need to
make it work like hex() and oct().
Recall that in 3.0, __bin__, __oct__, and
11 matches
Mail list logo
