Support float(<str>) and float(<bytes>)#442
Merged
windelbouwman merged 1 commit intoRustPython:masterfrom Feb 12, 2019
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Very cool! Maybe another idea, instead of lexical, use the rustpython_parser.lexer to lex the float. Then the behavior is the same between floating point literals and the |
Contributor
Author
|
Yeah, increasing the binary size would be unfortunate - I'd just like to see the float parsing performance be competitive with |
Contributor
|
I would not worry too much about performance right now, but should the behavior be actually the same? Anyways, the work looks good! I will merge it. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
NOTE: instead of using rust's
f64::from_str, I used thelexicalcrate, whose flexibility more closely matches Python's float parsing (e.g. it correctly supports all the variations in the test case of this PR, while the former does not). As a nice bonus, it's 4000x faster. You can read more about it here.