On 7 sep, 05:58, casevh <cas...@gmail.com> wrote: > ...
> > Also note that 1.1 * 1.1 is not the same as 1.21. > > >>> (1.1 * 1.1).as_integer_ratio() > > (5449355549118301, 4503599627370496)>>> (1.21).as_integer_ratio() > > (1362338887279575, 1125899906842624) > > This doesn't explain why 2.7.2 displayed a different result on your > computer. What do you get for as_integer_ratio() for (1.1 * 1.1) and > (1.21)? > Sure. I just picked up these numbers/expressions by chance. They came to my mind following the previous discussion. Sticking with the latest versions: >>> sys.version '2.7.2 (default, Jun 12 2011, 15:08:59) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)]' >>> (1.1 * 1.1).as_integer_ratio() (5449355549118301L, 4503599627370496L) >>> (1.21).as_integer_ratio() (1362338887279575L, 1125899906842624L) >>> >>> sys.version '3.2.2 (default, Sep 4 2011, 09:51:08) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)]' >>> (1.1 * 1.1).as_integer_ratio() (5449355549118301, 4503599627370496) >>> (1.21).as_integer_ratio() (1362338887279575, 1125899906842624) >>> Has "long" not disappeared 2.7? I have not the skill to dive into the machinery. I have only some theroretical understanding and I'm a little bit confused and have to face "there something strange somewhere". Test on Windows 7, 32 bits. jmf -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
