Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I'm not convinced that this deserves to be a math module function. I agree that `-(-x // y)`, while simple to write, isn't necessarily obvious. But it does have some advantages, like not needing an import, and being naturally duck-typed, so that it automatically does the right thing for floats, or `fractions.Fraction` objects, or `numpy.int64` objects, or SymPy integers. (Not for `Decimal` instances, but that's another story.) Unless we were to add a whole __ceildiv__ mechanism, a math module implementation would necessarily be limited to integers. (Or perhaps integers and floats.) There's also the "thin end of the wedge" argument: if ceildiv, why not also ceilrem, ceildivrem, rounddiv, roundmod, etc. The main issue with the `-(-x // y)` spelling seems to be discoverability: if everyone knew that this was the right way to spell ceiling division, then there wouldn't be a problem. And I'm not convinced that a math.ceildiv function would necessarily solve the discoverability problem, either. So maybe the solution is to advertise the `-(-x // y)` pattern better in documentation, for example at the point where floor division is introduced in the library reference? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue46639> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
