RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 9 00:08:32 CET 2007 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070896.html

Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> It is the implementation of
> 
> foo **= bar
> 
> (and that's its only use), so it ought to be binary.

Maybe it's so that a type can plug the same implementation
into both nb_pow and nb_inplace_pow. Although the same
effect could be achieved by just leaving nb_inplace_pow
null, so I suppose that's not necessary.

Might we want to add an in-place version of the 3-arg
pow() function one day? If so, leaving the third argument
there could be useful.

--
Greg

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-February/070896.html below:

[Python-Dev] Why is nb_inplace_power ternary?