Bug in math.frexp?

[Thomas Wouters]

On Mon, 3 Jul 2000 14:23:08 -0400, Tim Peters <tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote:
>Guys, this is not open to debate.  frexp is a std ANSI C function, Python
>calls the platform frexp directly, and the new docstring I checked in is an
>exact paraphrase of the std in Pythonic language.  I don't care what
>manpages say.  I *would* care if somebody can show an actual example of a
>Python implementation where the examples posted do not work exactly as
>shown:  that would mean the platform is buggy -- but the new docs are still
>correct <wink>.

Yes, yes, you're right. The posting that started this unnecessary discussion
was both wrong and mine (I'm sorry, it was late ;P) but in my defense: I had
intended to *mail* it to Fred, but my slrn (again) went on and had a life of
its own.

What I intended to say was 'the manpages I saw concur with Tim's
docstringchange', but it 1) came out wrong, and 2) was wrong -- the manpages
are confusingly phrased, just as Fred claimed. I had the best of intentions
though ;)

Apologizing-ly y'rs,