2007/8/29, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>: > It would have been good if you had indicated what result you had > expected instead. I assume 0; to get 0, you have to write -(3/2)+3/2, > or 0-3/2+3/2. Wow, that caught me: >>> -3/2+3/2 -1 >>> 0-3/2+3/2 0 >>> I'm not talking about division here, just the fact that in the first case, it was (-3) / 2 and not -(3/2). It's a surprise to me, taking into account that >>> -3**2 -9 >>> 0-3**2 -9 Here, the behavior is always the same: -(3**2). Do you know why? Thanks! -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
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