Terry J. Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> added the comment:
I agree with Tim. Drop the zero-info glosses. For real_quick_ratio(),
"Return an upper bound on ratio() even more quickly."
should be sufficient (assuming that it *is* always quicker.
Just curious, The descriptions say ratio() <= quick_ratio() and ratio() <=
very_quick_ratio. is it also guaranteed that quick_ratio() <=
real_quick_ratio()? Or might one 'luck out' with a better answer from the
faster method? (I can imagine either being true.)
----------
nosy: +tjreedy
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue8686>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
