2008/4/8, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > That's true, but it's sufficiently unlikely that a string > such as "<type 'foo'>" could have accidentally arisen some > other way that I don't lose any sleep over it. If weird > things seem to be happening in some particular case, I'll > put a repr() in to find out exactly what's going on. Most > of the time it's not needed, though. > > There's another reason it bothers me. If a string like > "<type 'foo'>" turns up in otherwise normal output, it's > a fairly clear indication that I've somehow ended up > printing something that was never meant to be printed. > Whereas if it just comes out as "foo", it could easily > go unnoticed.
I'm with Greg here, but I'll put it in another way: I don't want repr() to be nice, I want it to be as explicit as possible. I want to be able to trust repr(), and never doubt of what it's showing to me. Regards, -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/ _______________________________________________ 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
