The point was not to reopen the discussion; we've had the discussion
and the outcome is clear. The point was, what should be justified in
the PEP.
On 3/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Octal does need to be justified, since some people argued to remove
> > it. I guess binary needs to be justified because Thomas doesn't see
> > the need. :-)
>
> I see literals for octal and binary as similar to raising a tuple, or
> automatically unpacking one in a function call. It can be useful, but
> it isn't needed very often. When it does show up, it can be confusing
> *because* it is so rare.
>
> If I were only worried about one program, I would prefer to write:
>
> >>> oct(78) == "0o116"
>
> rather than:
>
> >>> from math import oct
> >>> oct(78) == int("123", 8)
>
> The preference isn't really overwhelming, though, and the use isn't
> very frequent. This doesn't seem like a big enough win to justify any
> extra complexity in the language.
>
> (And no, I wouldn't add hex either, but not adding is different from
> removing.)
>
> -jJ
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
_______________________________________________
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
