Message154377
| Author |
loewis |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, gvanrossum, larry, loewis, pitrou, r.david.murray |
| Date |
2012年02月26日.18:46:31 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.00050838717 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<20120226194630.Horde.LuvDUKGZi1VPSn4G8TLyn_A@webmail.df.eu> |
| In-reply-to |
<1330271805.31.0.204982845794.issue14127@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
> I suggest that publishing nanoseconds as a plain int would be a
> nasty API. Consider what it would do to os.utime:
No, it wouldn't. Please re-read Guido's proposal. If you want to
specify nanoseconds, you have to pass the ns= parameter. My only
quibble with the specific spelling is that it invokes Godwin's law
(but I can live that that as a theoretical concern, also).
> Have we ever published an API that treated a parameter as two wildly
> different numbers based solely on whether the parameter was an int
> or a float?
No, and Guido is on the record for objecting such APIs. Hence the
keyword parameter. |
|