infinite precision (was Re: Against PEP 240)
aahz at panix.com
Fri Jun 1 18:58:13 CEST 2001
[posted & e-mailed]
First of all, let me apologize. My original comment was intended to be
teasing, and I'm sorry this has descended into heavy-handedness.
In article <9f5lrt026g6 at enews2.newsguy.com>,
Alex Martelli <aleaxit at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The dictionary definitions don't represent the standard distinctions
>> used in CS.
>Can you back up this bold assertion with quotes supporting
>your contention that (if I get you right?) "infinite precision"
>means nothing attainable on a (necessarily finite) computer
>while "unbounded precision" means something attainable? I
>have quite a few counter-examples, such as:
Well, I guess you're right. It's not what I was taught in my CS
program, but I can't argue with the weight of publications you found.
It still doesn't feel right to me, though.
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2001 by aahz at pobox.com)
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
"Characters exist to suffer, you know. An author needs a little sadism
in her makeup." --Brenda Clough
More information about the Python-list