Patrick Yang <patrick.yang.1...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I ended up in this issue after I learnt the following from the Python Library Reference Manual. ---- float(..). For a general Python object x, float(x) delegates to x.__float__(). If __float__() is not defined then it falls back to __index__(). ---- The discussion on __int__() and __index__() was very interesting but I still didn't get the answer I wanted. If __int__() is assumed to be a possibly approximate conversion and it's possible that __int__() may exist while __index__() doesn't, shouldn't __int__() be used as a fall back before __index__()? The downside would be that the resulting float may not be "very close" to the original object because __int__() is only an approximation while __index__() guarantees exact, but loss of precision is acceptable during type conversion, isn't it? (i.e. int(3.14) -> 3). Perhaps it's not acceptable if the conversion is a widening conversion and that's why __int__() is skipped? ---------- nosy: +patrick.yang.1248 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue20092> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
