> TP> [Barry A. Warsaw] > >> ... So if "0x950412de" isn't the right way to write a 32 bit > >> pattern, > > TP> It isn't today, but will be in 2.4. > > But isn't that wasteful? Today I have to add the L to my hex > constants, but in a year from now, I can just turn around and remove > them again. What's the point? Think 5 years rather than 1 year. > The deeper question is: what's wrong with "0x950412de"? What bits > have I lost by writing my hex constant this way? I'm trying to > understand why hex constants > sys.maxint have to deprecated. We're not deprecating them. Instead, the type of hex constants in range(sys.maxint, 2*sys.maxint+2) will change from int to long, to be consistent with other hex constants. Currently: >>> 0xf > 0 True >>> 0xffff > 0 True >>> 0xfffffff > 0 True >>> 0xffffffff > 0 False <----------- This anomaly will disappear >>> 0xfffffffff > 0 True >>> 0xffffffffffffffff > 0 True >>> --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