Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <854n44blo9.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
References: <8e4c1ab1-e65d-483f-ad9d-6933ae2052c3@googlegroups.com> <acdae8c8-2b59-4289-9f2b-1e4dd52cbd62@googlegroups.com> <mailman.6441.1391685020.18130.python-list@python.org> <888bd2fc-54b0-4c46-9d7b-d81d01a78b52@googlegroups.com> <52f59aeb$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <fe00e52f-80cb-4c19-b0a1-79bfe0c34051@googlegroups.com> <mailman.6623.1392043356.18130.python-list@python.org> <7cc8f49d-a4c7-48c2-a0af-ac58c847d794@googlegroups.com> <mailman.6695.1392145462.18130.python-list@python.org> <71e578f8-0d23-4b8e-b9f2-b987bdc9c01d@googlegroups.com> <CAPTjJmo4qD2B7isr8yAK2t+22KqwaoFrT5b5U66mYe+VgwDkWA@mail.gmail.com> <85r478bv99.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> <CAPTjJmq6X8hOrNC4Qr4vrXZvCRg7UvBH=V__PDfeu9AUQ4qjUg@mail.gmail.com> <85ioskbtfm.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <CAPTjJmqKE5aTQemze8-X7bj9=mKe+BoNiEkvNteHnZB9Tt8+Rw@mail.gmail.com> <85eh38bq5z.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <CAPTjJmpfRaXajuxOvgHhrNpO-6z+KMxzt63D2LKB5Z3C-3ARLg@mail.gmail.com> <854n44blo9.fsf@benfinney.id.au>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:58:51 +1100
Subject: Re: Working with the set of real numbers
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Cc: "python-list@python.org" <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.6754.1392206334.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 38
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:66030

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> w=
rote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au>=
 wrote:
>> > That's why I think you need to be clear that your point isn't
>> > =E2=80=9Ccomputers don't work with real numbers=E2=80=9D, but rather =
=E2=80=9Ccomputers work
>> > only with a limited subset of real numbers=E2=80=9D.
>>
>> Hmm, I'm not sure that my statement is false. If a computer can work
>> with "real numbers", then I would expect it to be able to work with
>> any real number.
>
> Likewise, if you claim that a computer *does not* work with real
> numbers, then I would expect that for any real number, the computer
> would fail to work with that number.
>
> Which is why neither of those is a good statement of your position, IMO,
> and you're better off saying the *limitations* you're describing.

I think we're using different words to say the same thing here :)

What I mean is that one cannot accurately say that a computer works
with real numbers, because it cannot work with them all. Of course a
computer can work with _some_ real numbers; but only some. (An awful
lot of them, of course. A ridiculously huge number of numbers. More
numbers than you could read in a lifetime! While the number is
extremely large, it still falls pitifully short of infinity.[1]) And
so we do have optimizations for some subset of reals: in approximate
order of performance, an arbitrary-precision integer type, a limited
precision floating point type, and two types that handle fractions
(vulgar and decimal). They're all, in a sense, optimizations. In pure
theory, we could have a single "real number" type and do everything
with that; all the other types are approximations to that.

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc2795