Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/22/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Removing string %-formatting would be a backwards compatibility nightmare.
>> I doubt there's a Python program on the planet that would continue working if
>> it was removed (I know most of mine would break in verbose mode). Even those
>> which continued to work would likely break if all commented out debugging
>> messages were uncommented.
>
> The same is true for some other changes considered, e.g. the new I/O
> stack, all-unicode strings, and dict views.
>
> Py3k exists to *break* backwards compatibility. A format() method
> added to strings could be added to 2.6. Defining format() in terms of
> % would be a long-term disaster IMO.
That (adding .format() in 2.6) occurred to me, but I dismissed it for some
reason. It can't have been a very good reason though, since I sure can't
remember what it was.
In which case, Talin's PEP should probably suggest this as the implementation
strategy - python3warn and the instrumented python build can do their best to
pick up usage of % formatting, and we can add .format() to 2.6 so that forward
compatible code can be written in later 2.x releases.
Now that I think about it, simply having python3warn pick up all uses of % in
a print statement should pick up many of the uses of string formatting. (Not
all, obviously, but a lot of them)
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
