It seems a good idea to add __int__ to Fraction, but if you stop falling back to __trunc__, won't that cause backwards compatibility issues? I'd say looking for __trunc__ if the alternative is failing isn't so bad.

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 3:43 AM Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> wrote:
Currently __trunc__ is used for two purposes:

* In math.trunc() which just calls __trunc__.
* In int() and PyNumber_Long() as a fallback if neither __int__ nor
__index__ are implemented.

Unlike to __int__ and __index__ there is not a slot corresponding to
__trunc__. So using it is slower than using __int__ or __index__. float
and Decimal implement __int__ and __trunc__ by the same code. Only
Fraction implements __trunc__ but not __int__.

I propose to deprecate the falling back to __trunc__ for converting to
int and remove it in future. Fraction should implement __int__.

We cannot use __trunc__ for setting the nb_int slot because it can
return non-int.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6ZMQE4YTFZWN7H366YJG5QFNP6TFPMFZ/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/


--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
Pronouns: he/him (why is my pronoun here?)