Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> +0 from me. It is inevitable that this will be requested now that we have > comb(). Exactly my thoughts, too. I don't think I'll have any use for `math.perm`; the main reason to add it will be to satisfy all those who got taught combinations and permutations at the same time, see them as a unit, and then get surprised when they find `math.comb` without `math.perm`. The good part is that now that we have math.comb, I think everything about the API of math.perm is already clear (including what to call it). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue37128> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
