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 fredrikj
Recipients fredrikj, loewis, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, terry.reedy, vstinner
Date 2008-10-14.15:38:18
SpamBayes Score 1.8379724e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
> One other note:  in Fredrik's patch there's commented out code for a 
> numbits *property* (rather than a method).  Is there any good reason to 
> make this a property?

Aesthetically, I think numbits as a function would make more sense.
(Maybe if the hypothetical imath module comes along...)

> Since numbits() cost is O(n) with n: number of digits. I prefer a 
> method than a property because, IMHO, reading a property should be 
> O(1) (*read* an attribute is different than *compute* a value).

Unless I missed something, numbits() is O(1). Only the topmost word in a
number needs to be examined.

> reading a property should be O(1) (*read* an attribute is different
> than *compute* a value).

O(1) is necessary but not sufficient. My sense is that an attribute
should access an existing "part" of an object while an operation that
involves creating a "new" object should be a method. Compare
complex.real/.imag and complex.conjugate().
Date User Action Args
2008-10-14 15:38:21fredrikjsetrecipients: + fredrikj, loewis, rhettinger, terry.reedy, mark.dickinson, vstinner
2008-10-14 15:38:21fredrikjsetmessageid: <>
2008-10-14 15:38:20fredrikjlinkissue3439 messages
2008-10-14 15:38:18fredrikjcreate