[Python-Dev] A Horrible Inconsistency (original) (raw)
Facundo Batista facundobatista at gmail.com
Fri May 26 17:37:02 CEST 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] A Horrible Inconsistency
- Next message: [Python-Dev] A Horrible Inconsistency
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
2006/5/25, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik at pythonware.com>:
>>> -1 * (1, 2, 3) () >>> -(1, 2, 3) Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in TypeError: bad operand type for unary -
We Really Need To Fix This!
I don't see here an inconsistency. The operator "*" is not a multiplier as in math, it's more a "repeater", so math multiplier attributes don't apply here.
There's no concept like "negative tuple" or "positive tuple", so the second example is clearly an error.
Regarding the first line, in the docs expresely says "Values of n less than 0 are treated as 0".
I think that we can do one of the following, when we found "-1 * (1, 2, 3)":
- Treat -1 as 0 and return an empty tuple (actual behavior).
- Treat the negative as a reverser, so we get back (3, 2, 1).
- Raise an error.
Personally, +0 on the third.
Regards,
-- . Facundo
Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] A Horrible Inconsistency
- Next message: [Python-Dev] A Horrible Inconsistency
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]