-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 17, 2007, at 1:35 AM, Humberto Diogenes wrote:
> This is my first post to python-3000. After Guido PEPs-deadline
> announcement, I decided to discuss an old idea while it still has
> some chance of being accepted. :)
>
> No, I do not want i18n identifiers. What I'd like to propose is a
> standard syntax for i18n strings. Something like:
> print i"my string"
>
> My points are:
> * i18n is everywhere (or is it the other way around? :-)
> * Python has a tradition of incorporating good practices
> * _ = gettext.gettext; print _("my string") isn't very nice
>
> So, do you think that something like i"my string" would be better
> than _("my string")? Would it add unnecessary complexity to Python?
I've never understood the desire for an i-prefix, though it comes up
often. In py3k you won't have u-prefixes, but you'll still have r-
prefixes (I'm assuming), so while you'll have less prefix-explosion,
I still don't see much benefit in adding a prefix for something that
is perfectly well handled by a function call. Besides, if you used a
prefix you'd have to explain how the run-time aspects of translations
will get handled. Definitely PEP material.
- -Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBRiTTknEjvBPtnXfVAQKfiwP/WIxeq+iG1hXVYikH4vy6pkHHT96zsxRv
tJ9aYuhLOFDmWkhsXpiRsSnPzPMXvth3UHiHCYo+D1aOEUyHyqCAZ97iHcvD+N7T
PDycmWGl5dEaOBJ3ieXVV+0Bbv3i+J6QpA1Aj1QdS5o6pkB31STdt+3OPG2eKEiz
SQKG+YrpgAI=
=cR8m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
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
