Re: The potential for a Python 2.8.

References	(3 earlier) <mailman.5926.1390529147.18130.python-list@python.org> <roy-668EEC.21224223012014@news.panix.com> <mailman.5927.1390530488.18130.python-list@python.org> <roy-580E46.21344323012014@news.panix.com> <lbu1an$3rb$1@reader1.panix.com>
Date	2014-01-25 02:57 +1100
Subject	Re: The potential for a Python 2.8.
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.5945.1390579058.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 2014-01-24, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <mailman.5927.1390530488.18130.python-list@python.org>,
>>  Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
>>> >> Python 2.8j?
>>> >
>>> > You're imagining things.
>>>
>>> Get real... s'not gonna happen.
>>>
>> I wouldn't bet on that.  The situation keeps getting tensor and
>> tensor.
>
> I have a feeling there's a pun there based on the worlds "real" and
> "tensor", but I don't have the math skills required to figure it out.

MRAB suggested "2.8j", which looks like another system of version
number (where you go 2.8, then 2.8a, 2.8b, etc etc), but is a pun on
the notation for imaginary/complex numbers. Hence Roy said "imagining"
things. I tried to call him back to "real" numbers (ones that don't
involve the letter j), and Roy remarked in a way that mentioned
tensors [1], which can represent complex numbers, but I've never dug
into all that myself, so I'll let him explain in more detail. I then
said (though you didn't quote me) that this was a "rational"
discussion until I  suggested a version number involving e, which is
an irrational number (2.71828...), as is sqrt(8) which I also
mentioned at the same time (2.8284...).

I just violated [2]. Sorry.

ChrisA

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor
[2] http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DontExplainTheJoke

Thread

Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-01-24 02:05 +0000
  Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-01-23 21:22 -0500
    Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-01-24 13:28 +1100
      Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-01-23 21:34 -0500
        Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-01-24 13:39 +1100
        Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-01-24 15:36 +0000
          Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-01-25 02:57 +1100
          Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-01-24 12:17 -0500
          Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-01-25 04:30 +1100
          Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-01-24 19:56 -0500
            Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-01-24 19:07 -0600
            Re: The potential for a Python 2.8. Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-01-25 02:24 +0000

csiph-web