Patrick Maupin schrieb:
> On 3/18/07, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just want to add that I've adapted and extended Thomas' original patch
>> for the 0o123 syntax. It should be pretty complete.
>>
>> Open issues would probably be:
>> - should int("0755", 0) give 0o755? (IMO yes)
>
> The PEP covers this, with the answer current of "yes" for 2.6 and
> "exception" for 3.0. (It presumes int(x, 0) should be the same as the
> compiler tokenizer result.)
It isn't. We already said that int() should continue to accept "0x" and "0X"
prefixes for hexadecimal, for instance.
>> - what should "%#o" % 100 result in? "0144" or "0o144"?
>> - should oct(100) return "0144" or "0o144"?
>
> Thanks! I missed that the formatter had the '#' option, and
> completely forgot about the oct() function. I think TOOWTDI says
> 0o144 in both cases.
I agree.
Georg
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
