[issue18606] Add statistics module to standard library
Mark Dickinson
report at bugs.python.org
Mon Aug 12 12:53:17 CEST 2013
Mark Dickinson added the comment:
> Why? I've never encountered this recommendation before. x.__float__() > would be clearer, IMO.
Hmm; it would be better if I engaged by brain before commenting. I guess the point is that type(x).__float__(x) better matches the behaviour of the builtin float:
>>> class A:
... def __float__(self): return 42.0
...
>>> a = A()
>>> a.__float__ = lambda: 1729.0
>>>
>>> float(a)
42.0
>>> a.__float__()
1729.0
>>> type(a).__float__(a)
42.0
When you get around to tests, it would be nice to have a test for this behaviour, just so that someone who comes along and wonders the code is written this way gets an immediate test failure when they try to incorrectly "simplify" it.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue18606>
_______________________________________
More information about the Python-bugs-list
mailing list