proposed language change to int/int==float (was: PEP0238 lament)

[Bengt Richter]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:33:22 -0400, "Tim Peters" <tim at digicool.com> wrote:

>[Bengt Richter]
>> ...
>> There really shouldn't be that much floating point implementation
>> code in the interpreter or VM.
>
>Right, there isn't.
>
>> I wonder what it would take to rewrite it to take real advantage
>> of IEEE754.
>
>Since C provides no portable way to *spell* this stuff, it requires
>boundless masses of platform-specific #ifdef's.  That requires in turn a
>boundless supply of people who are expert in both 754 and their platform
>(where "platform" is a combination of compiler, library, HW, and sometimes
>subdivided across specific releases of any or all those).
>
>It would much easier to take advantage of 754 by simulating fp entirely in
>software, avoiding the platform HW and C fp facilities entirely.
>
I sort of expected you to say that, but don't you find that sad?

>> That would be a real Python distinction.
>
>Then again, distinctions aren't always a good thing <wink>.
>
>
Ok, enough excitement for a while ;-)

BTW, I couldn't find where it officially says a sequence expression's elements
are evaluated guaranteed left to right. E.g., if I write
    [foo(), bar(), baz()]
can I depend on global side effects of foo() to be available to bar(), and of bar()
to baz() in strict sequence? The sequences are at the top of the precedence table,
but what of the elements? Just want to make sure ;-)