Message272507
| Author | mark.dickinson |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Aaron.Meurer, Nofar Schnider, abarry, benjamin.peterson, eric.araujo, georg.brandl, gvanrossum, lisroach, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, pitrou, python-dev, rhettinger, sbaird, serhiy.storchaka, skrah, stutzbach, tim.peters, veky, vstinner, waldir, zach.ware |
| Date | 2016-08-12.09:06:07 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1470992768.21.0.223329478975.issue12345@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
BTW, if we're talking about useless constants in the math module, it's hard to get more useless than `math.e`: it's rare for `e` to turn up in formulas except in the form `e**<something>`, and the latter case is better catered for by the more accurate (and usually faster) expression `exp(<something>`. I'd even go so far as to call `math.e` *worse* than useless, since its presence leads people astray by encouraging them to write `math.e**x` instead of `exp(x)`. To give just one example, on my machine, the result of `exp(500)` has an error of 0.42 ulps, while `math.e**500` gives an error of over 150 ulps. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-08-12 09:06:08 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients: + mark.dickinson, gvanrossum, tim.peters, georg.brandl, rhettinger, ncoghlan, pitrou, vstinner, benjamin.peterson, stutzbach, eric.araujo, skrah, Aaron.Meurer, python-dev, sbaird, zach.ware, serhiy.storchaka, waldir, veky, abarry, Nofar Schnider, lisroach |
| 2016-08-12 09:06:08 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1470992768.21.0.223329478975.issue12345@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-08-12 09:06:08 | mark.dickinson | link | issue12345 messages |
| 2016-08-12 09:06:07 | mark.dickinson | create | |