Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?]

Marko Rauhamaa marko at
Tue Jul 21 11:10:58 CEST 2015

Laura Creighton <lac at>:

> In a message of Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:30:48 -0700, Rustom Mody writes:
>>Can some unicode/Chinese literate person inform me whether that
>>ideograph is equivalent to roman '9' or roman 'nine'?
> Ah, I don't understand you. What do you mean roman 'nine'? a phonetic
> way of saying things? What bankers use to help prevent forgeries?
> Something else?

This is getting deep. It is an embarrassing metamathematical fact that
numbers cannot be defined. At least, mathematicians gave up trying a
century ago.

   In mathematics, the essence of counting a set and finding a result n,
   is that it establishes a one to one correspondence (or bijection) of
   the set with the set of numbers {1, 2, ..., n}.

Our ancestors defined the fingers (or digits) as "the set of numbers."
Modern mathematicians have managed to enhance the definition
quantitatively but not qualitatively.


More information about the Python-list mailing list