Fredrik Lundh wrote: > for some reason, the language reference uses the term "string con- > version" for the backtick form of "repr": > The language reference also says that trailing commas for expressions work with backticks. This is incorrect. I think this is necessary to allow nested 'string conversions', so it is a doc error rather than an implementation error.
I can't think of a better term than string conversion. At least it is distinct from 'string formatting'. Personally I think that backticks in code look like an ugly hack and ``repr(expression)`` is clearer. If backticks were documented as a hackish shortcut for repr then great. :-) Michael Foord > http://docs.python.org/ref/string-conversions.html > > any suggestions for a better term ? should backticks be deprecated, > and documented in terms of repr (rather than the other way around) ? > > </F> > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/fuzzyman%40voidspace.org.uk > > _______________________________________________ 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
