On 2016-05-23 02:00, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2016-05-23, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Jon Ribbens
<jon+use...@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote:
On 2016-05-22, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016 01:52 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2016-05-22, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
How is this any better though? Complicated or not, people want to divide
1 by 2 and get 0.5. That is the functional requirement. Furthermore, they
want to use the ordinary division symbol / rather than having to import
some library or call a function.
That's a circular argument. You're defining the result as the
requirement and then saying that proves the result is necessary.
Clearly, people managed when 1/2 returned 0, and continue to do so
today in Python 2 and other languages.
I'm not defining the result. 4000+ years of mathematics defines the result.
OK, I'm bored of you now. You clearly are not willing to imagine
a world beyond your own preconceptions. I am not saying that my view
is right, I'm just saying that yours is not automatically correct.
If you won't even concede that much then this conversation is pointless.
The point of arithmetic in software is to do what mathematics defines.
Would you expect 1+2 to return 5? No. Why not? Where was the result
defined?
Are you trying to compete with him for the Missing The Point Award?
The relevant doc is PEP 238, dating to March 2001, when Python 2.2 was new.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
