Author vstinner
Recipients lemburg, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, steven.daprano, stutzbach, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2020-01-11.15:35:25
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1578756926.28.0.974014774107.issue39288@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
PR 17937 is ready to be reviewed. The tests passed on the regular CIs and buildbots: good.

> That last assumes you want -0 and +0 to act differently

It is the case: I wrote an unit test checking exactly that, and it works as expected on all platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, Intel, PPC, etc.).

> `nextafter()` is too widely implemented to fight against, despite the sucky name ;-)

nexttoward name is less ambiguous, but as you all said: "nextafter" name is way more popular. Honestly, it's not that hard to infer that the function can go "up" or "down" because it has a second parameter. If it's not obvious enough, maybe we can enhance the documentation.

--

About Wikipedia, the following articles are interesting for the ones like me who don't fully understand IEEE 754, rounding mode, etc.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_in_the_last_place
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_epsilon
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_754
History
Date User Action Args
2020-01-11 15:35:26vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, lemburg, tim.peters, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, stutzbach, steven.daprano
2020-01-11 15:35:26vstinnersetmessageid: <1578756926.28.0.974014774107.issue39288@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-01-11 15:35:26vstinnerlinkissue39288 messages
2020-01-11 15:35:25vstinnercreate