On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 03:55:49PM +0200, Thomas Wouters wrote: > I'd also say rational-literals are not that important. Looking at my own > Python code, I very rarely need a floating-point literal to start with. > Strings, plenty, dicts and lists fairly often, integers every now and then, > but floating point numbers very rarely, and almost all of them are just > '0.0' or an integer expressed as float to force float-division. Most of my > float objects come from (library) functions that return them. Having nice-looking literals is important even if they are not actually typed in the source code too often. The literal form is also the repr() for all built-in numeric types so far. I don't think we should break that. What would your like to see as the repr() of a rational number? The answer to this will also determine what you type in your source. Note that repr(n) is not necessarily str(n): >>> repr(f) '0.59999999999999998' >>> str(f) '0.6' So we could have: >>> repr(r) '3/5r' # or 'rat(3, 6)' >>> str(r) '3/5' Oren
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