Skip to content

Proposed clarification of spec for int/float/complex promotion #1748

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
JelleZijlstra wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Proposed clarification of spec for int/float/complex promotion #1748

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
d2a3bdf
Proposed clarification of spec for int/float/complex promotion
JelleZijlstra May 23, 2024
cfefa40
typo
JelleZijlstra May 23, 2024
cf3486f
remove incorrect case
JelleZijlstra May 23, 2024
6155dbd
Extend test
JelleZijlstra May 23, 2024
a442bfe
Guard against unreachability
JelleZijlstra May 23, 2024
9dd5297
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/main' into intfloat
JelleZijlstra Jun 29, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
typo
  • Loading branch information
@JelleZijlstra
JelleZijlstra committed May 23, 2024
commit cfefa40231f49b7e36ecf4828050eb7c869cf0eb
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/spec/special-types.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ system contains a special case.
When a reference to the built-in type ``float`` appears in a :term:`type expression`,
it is interpreted as if it were a union of the built-in types ``float`` and ``int``.
Similarly, when a reference to the type ``complex`` appears, it is interpreted as
a union of the builtin-types ``complex``, ``float`` and ``int``.
a union of the built-in types ``complex``, ``float`` and ``int``.
These implicit unions behave exactly like the corresponding explicit union types,
but type checkers may choose to display them differently in user-visible output
for clarity.
Expand Down