Author noam
Recipients christian.heimes, gvanrossum, nascheme, noam, rhettinger, tim.peters
Date 2007-12-18.12:34:49
SpamBayes Score 0.0242203
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <b348a0850712180434k2c0a6b7ap54975592ed070732@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1197973543.87.0.869201515539.issue1580@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
About the educational problem. If someone is puzzled by "1.1*3 !=
3.3", you could always use '%50f' % 1.1 instead of repr(1.1). I don't
think that trying to teach people that floating points don't always do
what they expect them to do is a good reason to print uninteresting
and visually distracting digits when you don't have to.

About the compatibility problem: I don't see why it should matter to
the NumPy people if the repr() of some floats is made shorter. Anyway,
we can ask them, using a PEP or just the mailing list.

About the benefit: If I have data which contains floats, I'm usually
interested about their (physical) value, not about their last bits.
That's why str(f) does what it does. I like repr(x) to be one-to-one,
as I explained in the previous message, but if it can be made more
readable, why not make it so?
History
Date User Action Args
2007-12-18 12:34:50noamsetspambayes_score: 0.0242203 -> 0.0242203
recipients: + noam, gvanrossum, tim.peters, nascheme, rhettinger, christian.heimes
2007-12-18 12:34:50noamlinkissue1580 messages
2007-12-18 12:34:49noamcreate