Message159953
| Author |
mark.dickinson |
| Recipients |
mark.dickinson, serhiy.storchaka, skrah |
| Date |
2012年05月04日.18:12:08 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1336155128.66.0.312689622467.issue14722@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> And it checks strictly out of ±DBL_MAX.
Nope. Values just larger than DBL_MAX won't raise OverflowError here.
> Because float(10**1000) returns no float('inf'), but raises an
> exception, I think that returning ±∞ will be wrong.
Possibly. But there's also the fact that 3.2 already returns inf here; we'd need a pretty good reason to break that. Like I said, I'm not sure which the right way to go here is. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2012年05月04日 18:12:08 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, skrah, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2012年05月04日 18:12:08 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1336155128.66.0.312689622467.issue14722@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012年05月04日 18:12:08 | mark.dickinson | link | issue14722 messages |
| 2012年05月04日 18:12:08 | mark.dickinson | create |
|