Tim Peters <[email protected]> added the comment:
Terry, we could do that, but the opposition here isn't strong, and is pretty
baffling anyway ;-) : the suggested changes are utterly ordinary for
implementations of rationals, require very little code, are not delicate, and
are actually straightforward to see are correct (although unfamiliarity can be
an initial barrier - e.g., if you don't already know that after
g = gcd(a, b)
a1 = a // g
b1 = b // g
it's necessarily true that a1 and b1 are coprime, a key reason for way the
transformation is correct will be lost on you - but it's also very easy to
prove that claim once you're told that it is a key here). The OP is right that
"we" (at least Mark, and Raymond, and I) have routinely checked in far subtler
optimizations in various areas.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue43420>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
