Message70545
| Author |
mark.dickinson |
| Recipients |
MrJean1, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, tim.peters |
| Date |
2008年08月01日.09:18:21 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.00061202375 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1217582303.22.0.945336662533.issue2819@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Toned down note in docs (at Raymond's request) in r65366.
While I'd really like to see an lsum-based version go in instead, I
think it's too close to the release to make this change right now.
There was also originally some talk of a complex math version. What do
people think about this? Personally, I suspect that the use cases would
be few and far between, and anyone who *really* needs a complex high-
precision sum can just apply math.fsum to real and imaginary parts.
(This is easier now that x.imag and x.real make sense for integers as
well as floats.) |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2008年08月01日 09:18:23 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, tim.peters, rhettinger, MrJean1 |
| 2008年08月01日 09:18:23 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1217582303.22.0.945336662533.issue2819@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年08月01日 09:18:22 | mark.dickinson | link | issue2819 messages |
| 2008年08月01日 09:18:21 | mark.dickinson | create |
|