On 1/24/07, Gareth McCaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> complex(complex(1.0, 2.0), complex(10.0, 20.0))
>
> (-19+12j)
>
> WTF? In any case, that's also what's destroying the sign of the
> imaginary part in complex(1.0, -0.0).
It seems pretty clear what it thinks it's doing -- namely,
def
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 08:39, Alexey Borzenkov wrote:
[me, about complex():]
> > It seems pretty clear what it thinks it's doing -- namely,
> > defining complex(a,b) = a + ib even when a,b are complex.
> > And half of why it does that is clear: you want complex(a)=a
> > when a is complex. Wh
On 1/24/07, Gareth McCaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Alexey:]
> I think that's the right thing to do, because that is mathematically
> correct. j is just an imaginary number with a property that j*j = -1. So
> (a+bj) + (c+dj)j = (a-d) + (b+c)j.
Yes, thanks, I know what j is, and I know how
On Wednesday 24 January 2007 10:20, Alexey Borzenkov wrote:
> > > I think that's the right thing to do, because that is mathematically
> > > correct. j is just an imaginary number with a property that j*j = -1.
> > > So
> > >
> > > (a+bj) + (c+dj)j = (a-d) + (b+c)j.
> >
> > Yes, thanks, I know wha
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007, Ulisses Furquim wrote:
>
> I've read some threads about signals in the archives and I was under
> the impression signals should work reliably on single-threaded
> applications. Am I right? I've thought about a way to fix this, but I
> don't know what is the current plan for s
Gareth McCaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ... The question is whether
> it makes sense to define complex(a,b) = a+ib for all a,b
> or whether the two-argument form is always in practice going
> to be used with real numbers[1]. If it is, which seems pretty
> plausible to me, then changing co
Thanks, but the question is really, "how do I build a better debug hook than
sys.getobjects?" so I argue this is a valid python-dev question.
We have been using gc.get_objects() but it has several problems:
1) It returns all objects in the system. This results in a list so long that
it often ki
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> Allowing a project to define a question & answer should do the trick -
> essentially a password like Skip suggested, but with a reminder right
> there on the page:
>
> "Type this project's name in lowercase in this box: _"
> "Type the BDFL's firs
Michael Hudson wrote:
> Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On 23/01/2007 10.20, Brian Warner wrote:
>>
> Do I miss something here, or is the buildbot hit by spammers now?
It looks like it is. If that continues, we have to disable the web
triggers.
>>> Good grief. If anyon
On 1/24/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree it's a bug, and I agree with your proposed analysis. Please
> try to come up with a patch (e.g. by putting a while(is_tripped) loop
> around the for loop). Also make sure you include test case.
Ok. I was discussing this problem wit
On 1/24/07, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Obviously, Unix and Microsoft systems depend on signals, so you
> can't simply regard them as hopelessly broken, but you can't assume
> that they are RELIABLE. All code should be designed to cope with
> the case of signals getting lost, if at
On 1/24/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ulisses Furquim schrieb:
> I've read some threads about signals in the archives and I was under
> the impression signals should work reliably on single-threaded
> applications. Am I right? I've thought about a way to fix this, but I
> don
Gustavo Carneiro schrieb:
>What about http://www.python.org/sf/1564547 ? It tries to solve a
> different problem, but I think it also fixes this one; at least as much
> as possible with the braindead unix signal programming interface...
I'm sceptical. It is way too much code for me to review,
On 1/24/07, Ulisses Furquim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1/24/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree it's a bug, and I agree with your proposed analysis. Please
> > try to come up with a patch (e.g. by putting a while(is_tripped) loop
> > around the for loop). Also make sur
14 matches
Mail list logo
