On 4/22/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) Whether to drop the optional parts of the proposal: > -- support for field expressions (was: locals() support) > -- support for direct access to current scope (was: locals() support)
I'd skip this. KISS etc. > 2) Should this PEP be targeted at Python 2.6 or 3.0? Both equally. We could implement it in the 3.0 branch first. > 3) Role and usage of custom formatters: > > "string".fformat( formatter, ... ) > > vs. > > MyFormat( "string" ).format( ... ) > > (note: I want to make it clear that the purpose of custom formatters is to > override the formatting on a *per-field basis*, but at the same time the > custom formatter should have access to the surrounding context.) I think a single format() method with a standard signature makes more sense. That way you can abstract the choice of formatter out. > 4) Should there be a way to pass in a dict argument without flattening it via > **args? Questionable. TOOWTDI; OTOH the flattening could be expensive. If we can figure out a way to optimize away the flattening as long as the callee is implemented in C, I'm in favor of dropping **kwds. > 5) Should the implementation attempt to detect unused arguments? I think so; the % operator is very strict about this and it's useful in debugging. > I'd like to get some sense of the answers before the next revision of the PEP. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
