round in 2.6 and 2.7

[Terry Reedy]

On 12/28/2010 4:47 PM, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
>>> "Float-to-string and string-to-float conversions are correctly rounded.
>>> The round() function is also now correctly rounded."

The second line was written to be parallel to the first, but the first 
is slightly ambiguous in that 'conversions' can refer to either process 
(not rounded, correctly or otherwise ;-) or result. However the 
parallelism does not does as 'round() function' is the instrument of the 
process and definitly not the result.

...

> I see. Shouldn't it say then "The round() function
> gives/produces/returns correctly rounded results now", instead of saying
> that
> the round function *is* correctly rounded? ISTM that the round
> function cannot be rounded (correctly or not):

In 2.7 "Float-to-string and string-to-float conversion results are 
correctly rounded, as are the results of the round() function."

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy