> Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com> writes: > > > If we have only pure signed and pure unsigned converters it would mean > > an extraordinary amount of work, but luckily it seems that that is not > > going to happen. [MvL] > Now I'm confused: "l" *is* a "pure signed converter", no? I.e. it > won't accept a value above 2**31-1, right? Correct. I think Jack's worry is that in 2.3, mask expressions can be negative, and if "k" were a pure unsigned converter, negative masks would not be accepted. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4