[Python-Dev] trunc() (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Sun Jan 27 19:33:06 CET 2008

On Jan 27, 2008 9:26 AM, Andrea Griffini <agriff at tin.it> wrote:

On Jan 27, 2008 5:43 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

> - Deprecating int() is pretty radical, I think it would have to > happen in the distant future. OR not at all. I'm at best +0 on this, > more like exactly 0. I realize that in practice this kills the idea. > The "purist" argument for it would have worked better if it was made > 18 years ago. Also what happens with "%i" % 3.14 ? We incidentally found a problem with a script using python 2.5 because apparently the "%" formatting operator doesn't use "int()" for doing the conversion (to be more specific if the float is too large for a 32-bit integer then the format operator chokes while the int() operator returns a long).

That's quite a separate issue. Please ses http://bugs.python.org/issue1742669.

Anyway I want just to say that if "implicit" conversion from float to integer goes away then what happens to formatting conversion ? Removing that too IMO would break a lot of code and it's IMO very difficult to help fixing that.

The formatting code could assign specific meanings. I suspect though that it was never meant to be possible to use %d with a float -- it just is one of the artifacts of using implicit conversion, and one not well-thought through. Note:

"%.0f" % 3.9999999999 '4' "%d" % 3.9999999999 '3'

I think the latter is wrong and confusing.

-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list