This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author gvanrossum
Recipients NeilGirdhar, belopolsky, brett.cannon, ethan.furman, ezio.melotti, gvanrossum, mark.dickinson, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2015-03-06.15:52:20
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
I think it's pretty silly to have And why would there be a
pure-Python implementation of factorial() (like anybody is ever going to
use that) instead of example implementations of sin() etc.? Please don't go
down this path for this particular module. Put your code in a recipe or

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Brett Cannon <> wrote:

> Brett Cannon added the comment:
> I interpret Guido's email as vetoing the skipping of the C implementation
> of PEP 485, not on outright banning a PEP 399 if someone like
> Victor wanted to put the work into implementing some things on top of the C
> code in Python. So as long as everything in the math module has a C
> equivalent I say implement whatever you want in Python code as long as
> maintenance won't be a burden.
> ----------
> nosy: +brett.cannon
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <>
> <>
> _______________________________________
Date User Action Args
2015-03-06 15:52:20gvanrossumsetrecipients: + gvanrossum, brett.cannon, mark.dickinson, belopolsky, vstinner, ezio.melotti, ethan.furman, serhiy.storchaka, NeilGirdhar
2015-03-06 15:52:20gvanrossumlinkissue23595 messages
2015-03-06 15:52:20gvanrossumcreate