Stefan Krah <stefan-use...@bytereef.org> added the comment: Mark Dickinson <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > Here's a patch. Stefan, could you please review?
Mark, sorry for not replying earlier. The patch looks great. I've also tested the patch in practice: I ran 700,000,000 random tests with an exponent range of [-999999999, 999999999]. This took three days. Without the patch, this would have been impossible; the range had to be restricted to [-9999, 9999]. Unfortunately I got sidetracked reviewing the rest of the function (today I started out on a mechanical proof of the nth-root part). I *did* review the changes though, and I think they are correct. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue12080> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
