why the inconsistency?

John Baxter news.collectivize at scandaroon.com
Tue Sep 30 23:24:51 CEST 2003


In article <d7bhnv4u6jak6asrfiv592sq9itt3i1286 at 4ax.com>,
 Christos "TZOTZIOY" Georgiou <tzot at sil-tec.gr> wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:04:24 GMT, rumours say that Michael Hudson
> <mwh at python.net> might have written:
> 
> [I, "if only int(math.log(x,10))..."]
> > >> worked correctly for *all* large values, like 10**70...
> 
> [Michael, using a larger number]
> > > Um, it does :-)
> 
> [Tim]
> >> You're not used to answering floating-point questions <wink>.
> 
> [Michael]
> >Or prehaps just conveniently ignoring what "work" means in a given
> >context :-)
> 
> I didn't reply earlier since Tim --how uncommon-- covered the subject
> better (he also corrected my +1 omission/misteak), but I believe you
> should have said: 'conveniently ignoring what "work correctly" means in
> a given context'... ;-)

"Work" and "work correctly" seem equivalent when one is speaking of 
computer programs.  Not so in lots of other contexts.

  --John

-- 
Email to above address discarded by provider's server.  Don't bother sending.




More information about the Python-list mailing list