Message256216
> As I understand the output of repr() is supposed to be something that can evaluated to recreate the same object.
Right, but that's an ideal that's not always achieved in practice. If I had my druthers, I'd 'fix' the repr of the complex object to return something that's written in terms of the constructor (for example, "complex(2.3, -0.0)"). I don't think that's a reasonable change from the POV of backwards compatibility though. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-12-11 14:45:35 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, vstinner, Mark Lundeberg |
2015-12-11 14:45:35 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1449845135.73.0.83556680124.issue25839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-12-11 14:45:35 | mark.dickinson | link | issue25839 messages |
2015-12-11 14:45:35 | mark.dickinson | create | |
|