On May 8, 6:10 pm, Nicolas Dandrimont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-05-08 15:54:42 -0700]: > > > Have a look at this: > > > >>> -123**0 > > -1 > > > The result is not correct, because every number (positive or negative) > > raised to the power of 0 is ALWAYS 1 (a positive number 1 that is). > > > The problem is that Python parses -123**0 as -(123**0), not as > > (-123)**0. > > And why is this a problem ? It is the "standard" operator precedence > that -123^0 is -(123^0), isn't it ? > > > I suggest making the Python parser omit the negative sign if a > > negative number is raised to the power of 0. That way the result will > > always be a positive 1, which is the mathematically correct result. > > That's what it does : > > >>> -123**0 > -1 > >>> (-123)**0 > > 1 > > > This is a rare case when the parser is fooled, but it must be fixed in > > order to produce the correct mathematical result. > > Again, the mathematical result is correct. -123^0 is -(123^0), not > (-123)^0. > > Regards, > -- > Nicolas Dandrimont > > signature.asc > 1KDownload
Signs include power. >>> -2**0 -1 >>> (-2)**0 1 >>> -(2**0) -1 +x, -x Positive, negative ~x Bitwise not ** Exponentiation from Help; However: >>> 2+3**1 5 >>> 2+3**2 11 So, the order of precedence table has not listed the identical order of operations with the implementation. I have hit parentheses in rolling too. In terms of money, processor-based operations may not be equals. Clock cycles cost fractions of time. But, I don't see x= -x in realty. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
