why the inconsistency?
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 :-)
> >> You're not used to answering floating-point questions <wink>.
> >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.
Email to above address discarded by provider's server. Don't bother sending.
More information about the Python-list