RetroSearch Browse

Fri Apr 20 06:48:11 EDT 2001 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2001-April/068654.html

"John W. Baxter" wrote:
> 
> In article <mailman.987707135.9028.python-list at python.org>, M.-A.
> Lemburg <mal at lemburg.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm sure this proof of
> >   concept will raise a few more questions regarding the
> >   usefulness of switching to rationals for literals like
> >   1.123.
> 
> I might be more tempted to create a Rational containing 1.123 by writing
> Rational(1123, 1000).  (Not to mention the opportunities for
> obfuscation:  Rational(2246, 2000) being just a non-obscure one.
> 
> And Paul makes a good case for Rational("1.123") I think.

Well, Moshe's plan is to have 1.123 result in a Rational(1123, 1000)
being created (instead of a Python float). The extension should 
make playing with this idea a whole lot easier.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
______________________________________________________________________
Company & Consulting:                           http://www.egenix.com/
Python Pages:                           http://www.lemburg.com/python/

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2001-April/068654.html below:

ANN: Experimental Number Types (Integer, Rational, Floats)