Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpic...@gmail.com> added the comment:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 11:51:17AM +0000, Mark Dickinson wrote: > The name "Integral" isn't actually _wrong_ as such; it's just perhaps > not the name that we would have chosen if we were inventing the > numbers ABC right now. > > If we add "Integer", we have to choose between > > - maintaining both names indefinitely, or > - deprecating and eventually removing the "Integral" name > > Neither option seems appealing: the first is a violation of "one > obvious way"; the second causes unnecessary work for third-party > projects already using Integral. The second option require very small part of work (oneline patch, to be precise). The one of the best parts of the Python is that it's a live language. I.e. wrong decisions could be corrected. The current one is not wrong, in a strict sense, but if the C standard, wikipedia pages, etc (include the Scheme numbers tower) reference integer types and CPython docs call this "integral" - I'm not sure if the later is a good name. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32891> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
