RetroSearch Browse

Thu Jan 24 22:11:54 CET 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076466.html

[Raymond Hettinger]
> Since something similar is happening to math.ceil and math.floor,
> I'm curious why trunc() ended-up in builtins instead of the math
> module.  Doesn't it make sense to collect similar functions
> with similar signatures in the same place?

[Christian Heimes]
> Traditionally the math module is a tiny wrapper around the
> system's libm. Functions for magic hooks like __trunc__ 
> usually end up in builtins. In this particular case I don't
> mind where the function is going to live.

Traditions have gone out the window.  ceil() and floor()
are going to have their signatures changed (Real --> Integral)
and are going to have their own magic methods.  They cannot
be characterized as a thin wrapper around libm.

So the question stands, why is trunc() different?  Can anything
good come from having trunc() and int() in the same namespace?

Raymond

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076466.html below:

[Python-Dev] trunc()