Steve Holden wrote:
[...snipped a long and very helpful post addressing some
questions I had regarding the nature of an object's value
in python...]
Sorry for the belated reply Steve (I had some access
problems) but did want to let you know I found that post
very informative, and wanted to thank
Tim Peters a écrit :
> [Alex Martelli]
> ...
>>> In mathematics, 1 is not "the same" as 1.0 -- there exists a natural
>>> morphism of integers into reals that _maps_ 1 to 1.0, but they're still
>>> NOT "the same" thing. And similarly for the real-vs-complex case.
- but does there exists any sense
Mike Meyer wrote :
>
> For even more fun, consider 1.0 == 1 == decimal.Decimal('1.0').
>
Python 2.4.2 (#67, Sep 28 2005, 12:41:11) [MSC v.1310 32 bit (Intel)] on
win32
Type "copyright", "credits" or "license()" for more information.
>>> import decimal
>>> 1 == 1.0 == decimal.Decimal('1.0')
Fa
[Alex Martelli]
...
>> In mathematics, 1 is not "the same" as 1.0 -- there exists a natural
>> morphism of integers into reals that _maps_ 1 to 1.0, but they're still
>> NOT "the same" thing. And similarly for the real-vs-complex case.
[Xavier Morel]
> I disagree here, 1 and 1.0 are the same math
Alex Martelli wrote:
> Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
>>> 3. If two objects are equal with "==", does that
>>> mean their values are the same?
>> Almost universally, yes, although if you know enough about how the
>> interpreter works "under the hood" you can define the response
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:08:43 +, Steve Holden wrote:
>
>
>>I just wish Mike Meyer and Steven D'Aprano were close enough that you
>>could bang their heads together. In the same playground, perhaps? :-)
>
>
> Well, after such a deeply-reasoned, well-explained refutati
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 06:08:43 +, Steve Holden wrote:
> I just wish Mike Meyer and Steven D'Aprano were close enough that you
> could bang their heads together. In the same playground, perhaps? :-)
Well, after such a deeply-reasoned, well-explained refutation of my
position, what can I do but
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just wish Mike Meyer and Steven D'Aprano were close enough that you
> could bang their heads together.
We might be. But the results would probably be catastrophic for the
surrounding area.
http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Martelli) writes:
> Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
>> > 3. If two objects are equal with "==", does that
>> > mean their values are the same?
>> Almost universally, yes, although if you know enough about how the
>> interpreter works "under the hood" you
Alex Martelli wrote:
> Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
>
>>>3. If two objects are equal with "==", does that
>>> mean their values are the same?
>>
>>Almost universally, yes, although if you know enough about how the
>>interpreter works "under the hood" you can define the respon
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > 3. If two objects are equal with "==", does that
> > mean their values are the same?
>
> Almost universally, yes, although if you know enough about how the
> interpreter works "under the hood" you can define the response of
> instances of your
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Fredrik Lundh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>>
>>you really have trouble with abstract concepts, don't you?
>
>
> Usually not when they are explained well.
>
You want to be careful - the bot will get you! Don't be rude to the bot!
>
>>*what* the value i
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:12:00 +, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>Note to nitpickers
>--
>Please note that I *am* oversimplifying here, and the nitpickers will
>undoubtedly find many threadsworth of valuable material here. The point
>is to develop an understanding
13 matches
Mail list logo
