Message106503
| Author |
belopolsky |
| Recipients |
belopolsky, jackdied, jess.austin, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan |
| Date |
2010年05月26日.02:19:05 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.003718948 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1274840349.37.0.402621547751.issue5516@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Could you provide some reasoning for such a resolution?
> I had thought that "won't fix" indicated that the issue
> wasn't actually an error in behavior.
No, that would be "invalid." IMO, "won't fix" is for bugs were cost of fixing them outweighs the benefits. Here is a typical example: issue8309 "Sin(x) is Wrong".
Here, however I am torn between "won't fix" and "invalid." As I said in my previous comment:
"""
Note, however that the problematic behavior is due to D/DT
classes implementor's choice not to derive DT from D. Whether
resulting violation of the symmetry of equality is a bug in python or
D/DT implementation is at least an open question.
"""
I don't mind keeping this open if there is a hope that someone will come up with a working solution. The current patch is not a solution. |
|