Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
To: python-list@python.org
From: Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu>
Subject: Re: The potential for a Python 2.8.
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 12:17:33 -0500
References: <lbs380$eis$1@ger.gmane.org> <lbsctm$qvi$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAPTjJmqufJKG68_8x8kSBXM9oDhv_fUg_LfyB9iS0HZ_9yQFmg@mail.gmail.com> <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> <CAPTjJmrxb23Ezyg895Ott45mAfJ453b05yv19QgayBV0S+Dc0g@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPTjJmrxb23Ezyg895Ott45mAfJ453b05yv19QgayBV0S+Dc0g@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.5950.1390583866.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 44
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:64696

On 1/24/2014 10:57 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> 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

In this case, the explanation is as funny as the joke.


-- 
Terry Jan Reedy