Message77069
| Author | mark.dickinson |
|---|---|
| Recipients | christian.heimes, gvanrossum, mark.dickinson, tim.peters, vstinner |
| Date | 2008-12-05.21:04:46 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.00014526823 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1228511087.85.0.636512519259.issue1814@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I agree that this probably isn't right for core Python. But I think this is valuable work, and it would be nice to see this patch available and maintained somewhere, if anyone has the energy. I'm wondering whether the Sage folks would be interested in this; as I understand it, they currently have Python integers *and* Sage integers (based on GMP), along with various rules about which integers you can use for what. For example, according to http://www.sagemath.org/doc/prog/node21.html you can't use a Sage integer as a list index. Having just one type of integer might simplify things a little. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-12-05 21:04:48 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients: + mark.dickinson, gvanrossum, tim.peters, vstinner, christian.heimes |
| 2008-12-05 21:04:47 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1228511087.85.0.636512519259.issue1814@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008-12-05 21:04:47 | mark.dickinson | link | issue1814 messages |
| 2008-12-05 21:04:46 | mark.dickinson | create | |