Author mark.dickinson
Recipients George K, docs@python, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, steve.dower
Date 2017-07-17.07:17:00
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1500275820.45.0.328303262358.issue30940@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
[Serhiy]
> Wasn't this change a mistake? Seems Mark opposed to it.

Shrug. It seemed unnecessary to me to explicitly support `None` as a second argument, but it's done now; reverting the change at this point would do more harm than good.

So indeed there's a minor inaccuracy in the docs here. I'd suggest replacing the sentence identified with:

"The return value is an integer if *ndigits* is omitted or *None*. Otherwise the return value has the same type as *number*."
History
Date User Action Args
2017-07-17 07:17:00mark.dickinsonsetrecipients: + mark.dickinson, rhettinger, docs@python, serhiy.storchaka, steve.dower, George K
2017-07-17 07:17:00mark.dickinsonsetmessageid: <1500275820.45.0.328303262358.issue30940@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-07-17 07:17:00mark.dickinsonlinkissue30940 messages
2017-07-17 07:17:00mark.dickinsoncreate