On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Arguably, *integer* 0**0 could be zero, on the basis that you can't take >> limits of integer-valued quantities, and zero times itself zero times >> surely has to be zero.
I should have responded in more detail here, sorry. If you aren't performing any multiplication, why does it matter what numbers you are "multiplying"? Doing no multiplications of five is the same as doing no multiplications of two is the same as doing no multiplications of... 0. You can define it to be 0 but only if you are multiplying an empty bag of zeroes, but it's hard to imagine what makes an empty bag of zeroes different from an empty bag of fives. It really surely is *not* the case. Obviously, this kind of ridiculousness comes naturally to Java and C++ programmers, with their statically typed collections. It's no surprise that's where the Decimal spec came from. ;) -- Devin -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
