"Strong typing vs. strong testing" [OT]
greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz
Thu Oct 14 11:59:31 CEST 2010
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> under Euclidean
> geometry, there was a time when people didn't know whether or not the
> ratio of circumference to radius was or wasn't a constant, and proving
> that it is a constant is non-trivial.
I'm not sure that the construction you mentioned proves that
either, because it relies on the same assumptions about scaling
of polygons that one makes about circles in Euclidean geometry.
Seems to me the significance of it is not that it proves
anything about the constness of pi, but that it provides a way
of *calculating* pi to any desired accuracy. Before that,
people had to rely on measurements of physical circles to
come up with estimates for the value of pi.
More information about the Python-list