Nick Maclaren wrote:
> The word "better" is emotive and inaccurate.  Such calculations are
> numerically meaningless, and merely encourage the confusion between
> consistency and correctness.  There is a strong sense in which giving
> random results between -1 and 1 would be better.

I did, of course, mean more consistent (and yes, random consistent 
results would be "better" by this definition and indeed I would prefer 
that over inconsistent but more accurate results ;-)

Cheers,
   - Andreas
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to