Author loewis
Recipients Arfrever, gvanrossum, larry, loewis, pitrou, r.david.murray
Date 2012-02-26.18:46:31
SpamBayes Score 0.000508387
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <20120226194630.Horde.LuvDUKGZi1VPSn4G8TLyn_A@webmail.df.eu>
In-reply-to <1330271805.31.0.204982845794.issue14127@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> I suggest that publishing nanoseconds as a plain int would be a  
> nasty API.  Consider what it would do to os.utime:

No, it wouldn't. Please re-read Guido's proposal. If you want to
specify nanoseconds, you have to pass the ns= parameter. My only
quibble with the specific spelling is that it invokes Godwin's law
(but I can live that that as a theoretical concern, also).

> Have we ever published an API that treated a parameter as two wildly  
> different numbers based solely on whether the parameter was an int  
> or a float?

No, and Guido is on the record for objecting such APIs. Hence the
keyword parameter.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-02-26 18:46:32loewissetrecipients: + loewis, gvanrossum, pitrou, larry, Arfrever, r.david.murray
2012-02-26 18:46:31loewislinkissue14127 messages
2012-02-26 18:46:31loewiscreate