Understood. Maybe I'll just use this technique to implement %b, and leave everything else alone. I'll investigate.
Guido van Rossum wrote: > I think there are too many risks with this approach, especially given > that we're keeping % formatting mainly for backwards compatibility > reasons. There will inevitably be corner cases where the conversion > doesn't work exactly the same way as the old code or where the > conversion is wrong for whatever reason, and it would be quite painful > to change back. > > If 2.6 can't support %b, so be it. > > On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Eric Smith > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm working on issue 2416, adding %b to % formatting >> (http://bugs.python.org/issue2416). It's really quite a pain, >> especially in 2.6 with int and long and str and unicode. >> >> I'm contemplating just making % formatting compute a new format string >> and call str.format (or obj.__format__, or something appropriate). But >> before I proceed, I thought I'd ask and see if this really offends >> anyone. By implementing % in terms of str.format, I hope to be able to >> delete a lot of the duplication in the formatting code, but I haven't >> checked yet to see what's possible. The real impetus is issue 2416, though. >> >> About the only downside I see is that str.format is somewhat slower than >> %, but I can probably get around most of this by directly calling >> int.__format__, float.__format__, etc. Other than misleading >> microbenchmarks, I've never really compared the difference, though. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/guido%40python.org >> > > > _______________________________________________ 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
