Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #68431
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: 'complex' function with string argument. |
| Date | 2014-03-17 11:18 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <lg779d$5f4$2@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <8c862bec-815e-424c-81e2-8f37ebab1c35@googlegroups.com> |
On 3/15/14 11:26 AM, Jayanth Koushik wrote:
This is a very interesting philosophical question, one which I am
surprised no one has answered; although, I think the reason for that
might be entirely obvious.
You actually answered your own question, as you were asking it. If the
doc says "whatever you do, don't push the purple button," well, leave
the purple button alone. :) (I don't know, push it if you want)
If you monitor the PEP process, or have ever taken part in python-ideas,
or python-dev (either directly, or just lurking) you will notice that
python is developed through a very interesting active committee process
(that is really something phenomenal; cool community).
How should one spell a complex number? Should we use i or j ? Should the
imaginary part be set off somehow? Should literals be parsed
differently (or consistently) with correctly formed strings? Who knows,
beats me.
consider:
>>> complex( 3 + 2 j)
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>>> complex( 3 +2j )
(3+2j)
>>>
I don't know... you tell me.
>>> complex('3+2j')
(3+2j)
>>> complex('3 +2j')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#17>", line 1, in <module>
complex('3 +2j')
ValueError: complex() arg is a malformed string
>>>
Again, beats me. I just don't know.
But I do know that the spelling book says, Do it this way:
complex('3+2j').
Seems simple enough.
Philosophically, I tend to think about it this way. A complex number is
like any other number. I would not form a PI string like this> ' 3 .14 1
5 9265 3 . . .' I would rather see it formed like so, '3.1415926535'
This '3 + 2j' is not a number, its an algebraic sum.
This '3+2j' is a complex number. Ok, maybe not, but its closer to
what we expect (I'm sorry, but I like i instead of j )
Also, philosophically, C ignores white space; python does not.
I agree with this now; before I did not. White space is just as much a
part of how interpretation occurs, within symbol processing/parsing.
Some choices are arbitrary, some are community concurrence (PEPs), some
are philosophical, and most are just convenient intuition.
My Greek professor used to say, "there is no 'why' in Greek".
Python is similar.
Cheers
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
'complex' function with string argument. Jayanth Koushik <jnkoushik@gmail.com> - 2014-03-15 09:26 -0700
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 11:18 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 04:03 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-17 20:15 +0200
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 12:28 -0600
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 05:59 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-17 21:22 +0200
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 06:32 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 04:08 +0000
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-17 13:20 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 04:52 +0000
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 15:59 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 11:14 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 00:30 -0700
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 10:51 +0200
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 02:52 -0700
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 12:09 +0200
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 04:33 -0600
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-19 12:53 +0200
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 13:35 -0600
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-19 06:04 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-19 07:35 -0700
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-19 12:45 -0600
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Mark Dickinson <mdickinson@enthought.com> - 2014-03-17 17:55 +0000
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-17 18:06 -0400
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-17 18:59 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 11:16 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> - 2014-03-17 20:07 -0500
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-03-18 08:04 +0100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-18 18:11 +1100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-18 08:00 +0000
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-03-18 09:21 +0100
Re: 'complex' function with string argument. Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-18 16:00 +0200
csiph-web