Bug in math.frexp?

[david_ullrich at my-deja.com]

In article <LNBBLJKPBEHFEDALKOLCGENKGHAA.tim_one at email.msn.com>,
  "Tim Peters" <tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote:
> Guys, this is not open to debate.  frexp is a std ANSI C function,
Python
> calls the platform frexp directly, and the new docstring I checked in
is an
> exact paraphrase of the std in Pythonic language.  I don't care what
> manpages say.  I *would* care if somebody can show an actual example
of a
> Python implementation where the examples posted do not work exactly as
> shown:  that would mean the platform is buggy -- but the new docs are
still
> correct <wink>.

   Indeed. I haven't seen the new docs except for that docstring
you posted - I was gonna suggest that maybe you might even want
to be explicit about the fact that the _sign_ of the mantissa
is the same as the sign of the argument (if it's already there
never mind, all I saw was a statement about abs(mantissa), but
I'm know to be sort of blind sometimes.)

   One might say of course that's what the sign of the mantissa
is, what else makes sense. But you may as well be explicit -
someone right here seemed to think that the sign of the
_exponent_ should be the same as the sign of the argument.

> arrogant-but-with-cause-in-this-case-ly y'rs  - tim

   Don't look all that arrogant to me, which probably
explains a lot.

DU


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.