STINNER Victor <vstin...@python.org> added the comment:
> NumPy has nextafter.
That's why I proposed math.nextafter() name.
Moreover, in the math module, most functions reuse the same names than C
function names: expm1(), atan2(), erf(), etc.
> IEEE 754, on the other hand, requires instead nextUp and nextDown, which take
> a single argument and move towards +inf or -inf (respectively).
When I played with bpo-39277, I used nextafter() to try to implement manually a
conversion from an integer to a float using rounding towards zero. So I prefer
nextafter() than nextUp()/nextDown(): it gives more features.
> but nextAwayFromZero doesn't match any of these
It seems easy to reimplement it using nextafter(), no?
def nextAwayFromZero(x):
if x < 0:
return math.nextafter(x, -float("inf"))
else:
return math.nextafter(x, +float("inf"))
> Python's Decimal type has a two-argument next_toward method.
It also has next_minus() and next_plus() which don't match "nextUp and
nextDown" names requires by IEEE 754.
I'm not comfortable with math.next_after() or math.next_toward() name: use a
different than the libc function name (add an underscore). For me, the math
module is a thin wrapper to libm function, as the os module is a thin wrapper
to libc functions.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue39288>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
