Message335922
| Author | mark.dickinson |
|---|---|
| Recipients | mark.dickinson, pablogsal, rhettinger, skrah, steven.daprano, tim.peters |
| Date | 2019-02-19.10:41:11 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1550572871.94.0.520372433591.issue36027@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Here's an example of some code in the standard library that would have benefited from the availability of `pow(x, n, m)` for arbitrary negative n: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e7a4bb554edb72fc6619d23241d59162d06f249a/Lib/_pydecimal.py#L957-L960 if self._exp >= 0: exp_hash = pow(10, self._exp, _PyHASH_MODULUS) else: exp_hash = pow(_PyHASH_10INV, -self._exp, _PyHASH_MODULUS) where: _PyHASH_10INV = pow(10, _PyHASH_MODULUS - 2, _PyHASH_MODULUS) With the proposed addition, that just becomes `pow(10, self._exp, _PyHASH_MODULUS)`, and the `_PyHASH_10INV` constant isn't needed any more. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2019-02-19 10:41:11 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients: + mark.dickinson, tim.peters, rhettinger, steven.daprano, skrah, pablogsal |
| 2019-02-19 10:41:11 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1550572871.94.0.520372433591.issue36027@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2019-02-19 10:41:11 | mark.dickinson | link | issue36027 messages |
| 2019-02-19 10:41:11 | mark.dickinson | create | |