Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 9/6/05, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>printf('$1 forgot to frobnicate the $2!\n', username, file.name,
>> to=sys.stderr)
>>
>>While that's a little less self-descriptive for a translator to deal
>>with (who would only see the string, not the call site), it certainly
>>looks nicer for a non-i18n application, and could certainly work for an
>>i18n app too. It's a neat idea worth exploring.
>
>
> Is it worth doing this and completely dropping the %-based formats in
> Py3k? (Just asking -- it might be if we can get people to get over the
> shock of $ becoming first class ;-).
>
>
>>Also, I think you posted in a separate article a syntactic proposal for
>>including detailed formating in $-vars. ${varname:fmt} where 'varname'
>>could be an identifier a la PEP 292 or possibly a positional argument.
>
>
> +1
>
> I proposed ${varname%fmt} earlier but it prevents you to extend the
> varname syntax to arbitrary expressions, which I think is an extension
> that will get lots of requests.
>
I would anticipate security issues with allowing general expressions:
you are effectively allowing access to eval(). If a naiive programmer
were to use unverified input as a format string unpleasant things could
happen ... your call, but it seems dangerous to me. Remember C's printf
has been the source of some very dangerous errors.
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
