On Jan 17, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Adam Olsen wrote: > On 1/17/06, Thomas Wouters <thomas at xs4all.net> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 09:23:29AM -0500, Jason Orendorff wrote: >> >>> I think a method 5664400.to_base(13) sounds nice. >> [And others suggested int-methods too] >> >> I would like to point out that this is almost, but not quite, >> entirely as >> inapropriate as using str(). Integers don't have a base. String >> representations of integers -- and indeed, numbers in general, as >> the Python >> tutorial explains in Appendix B -- have a base. Adding such a >> method to >> integers (and, I presume, longs) would beg the question why >> floats, Decimals >> and complex numbers don't have them. > > I dream of a day when str(3.25, base=2) == '11.01'. That is the > number a float really represents. It would be so much easier to > understand why floats behave the way they do if it were possible to > print them in binary. Actually if you wanted something that closely represents what a floating point number is then you would want to see this:: >>> str(3.25, base=2) '1.101e1' >>> str(0.25, base=2) '1.0e-10' Printing the bits without an exponent is nearly as misleading as printing them in decimal. -bob
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