On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Sylvain MARIE < [email protected]> wrote:
> > A thought just occurred to me. Maybe we should just add a Boolean class > to numbers? > > That would be great indeed > > > It's a subclass of Integral, presumably. And normally only builtins.bool > is registered with it. But np.bool can be added at the same point you > register the other np integral types. > > I would rather suggest to keep that Boolean ABC class independent of > Integral (see proposal in first post) to let it remain 'pure', i.e. > represent logical booleans only. However nothing prevents us to register > python bool as a virtual subclass of *both* Integral and Boolean - while > np.bool would be registered as a virtual subclass of Boolean only. This > would reflect quite well the reality - the fact that python bool is both a > Boolean and an Integer, while numpy bool is only a Boolean. > OK, that could work. At this point I think you should just file an issue on bugs.python.org (but since Python 3.7 is in feature freeze, expect this to be put on the 3.8 track). > By the way, is there a reason for the name "Integral" (algebraic theory) > instead of "Integer" (computer science) ? Would it be practically feasible > to add "Integer" as an alias to "Integral" in the numbers package ? > Hm, perhaps Integral is an adjective, just like Boolean? Though it's also possible that it was simply a mistake. In general I don't like adding aliases for different spellings -- it violates TOOWTDI. If we decide that this really was a mistake we should go ahead and make Integer the recommended way and define Integral as an alias for backwards compatibility. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
